|
 CO2
is a natural occurrence in the atmosphere. It is a biproduct of
decay and fermentation and is commonly referred to as a greenhouse
gas. It is tied to agriculture in that the decay and fermentation of
farm waste is responsible in part for the production of this gas
known as Carbon Dioxide.
There are other sources for CO2 including industrial waste and
fossil fuel incineration or acts of nature such as volcanos..
Carbon Dioxide is a useful part of the ecosystem in that it is
utilized by growing plants for photosynthesis and expelled back into
the atmosphere as life-sustaining oxygen.
CO2 also has its uses. It is utilized in welding, as an ingredient
in fire extinguishers, and is added to carbonated beverages like
seltzer and beer.
While none of this sounds terrible there is a flip side and that is
that the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased dramatically
in the last 100 years from 280 parts per million or about 0.025%
saturation to 421 parts per million or about 0.04% saturation.
The increase in these levels
is being attributed to increased burning of fossil fuels and overall
industrialization.
This has led to a number of activities intended to reduce the
“carbon footprint” including proposals for carbon reduction in the
agricultural sector, a shift to “clean energy” and proper capture
and storage of excess carbon via sequestration.
What is Carbon Sequestration?
Carbon sequestration is the process of storing carbon in a carbon
pool. These pools can be natural occurring, but technology is also
being used to enhance the physical act of sequestration.
Natural occurring sequestration is the process of having carbon
dioxide stored in plant life for photosynthesis with the waste
product released into the atmosphere being oxygen. Some of the
proposals for enhancing this type of sequestration includes asking
agricultural producers to utilize less acres for harvestable crops
and instead planting those acres to rapidly growing lush greens that
will consume greater quantities of the CO2.
The less natural way of sequestering carbon dioxide is through
injections into the earth’s sub-surface utilizing Saline aquifers or
aging oil fields.
Then there is the definition that has been of greatest concern
locally, as presented by the United States Geological Survey, which
reads "Carbon sequestration is the process of capturing and storing
atmospheric carbon dioxide."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change defines carbon
sequestration as "a process in which a relatively pure stream of
carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial sources is separated, treated
and transported to a long-term storage location."
The last portion of the IPCC definition “transported to a long-term
storage location” is what is causing the greatest concern in Logan
County because that transport method could be an underground
pipeline running through the county from west to east in an area
north of Lincoln including the Atlanta area.
Should a CO2 pipeline be
permitted in Logan County?
This is a concern for several Atlanta residents specifically, and
many Logan County residents in general.
The state of Illinois is going to have the final word as to whether
a pipeline is going to be permitted to run through Logan County. But
at the same time, county government and other entities do have some
viable options for disputing the construction of a pipeline.
The state’s “Carbon Dioxide Transportation and Sequestration act
(220 ILCS 75/1) offers the following information:
Sec. 15. Scope. This Act applies to the
application process for the issuance of a certificate of authority
by an owner or operator of a pipeline designed, constructed, and
operated to transport and to sequester carbon dioxide produced by a
clean coal facility, by a clean coal SNG facility, or by any other
source that will result in the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions
from that source.
The terms and conditions for getting approval for a pipeline are
outlined in Section 20 (b)
Section 20 (b):
(8) the proposed pipeline is consistent with the public interest,
public benefit, and legislative purpose as set forth in this Act. In
addition to any other evidence the Commission may consider on this
specific finding, the Commission shall consider the following:
(A) any evidence of the effect of the pipeline upon the economy,
infrastructure, and public safety presented by local governmental
units that will be affected by the proposed pipeline route;
(B) any evidence of the effect of the pipeline upon property values
presented by property owners who will be affected by the proposed
pipeline or facility, provided that the Commission need not hear
evidence as to the actual valuation of property such as that as
would be presented to and determined by the courts under the Eminent
Domain Act;
(C) any evidence presented by the Department of Commerce and
Economic Opportunity regarding the current and future local,
State-wide, or regional economic effect, direct or indirect, of the
proposed pipeline or facility including, but not limited to, ability
of the State to attract economic growth, meet future energy
requirements, and ensure compliance with environmental requirements
and goals;
(D) any evidence addressing the factors described in items (1)
through (8) of this subsection (b) or other relevant factors that is
presented by any other State agency, the applicant, a party, or
other entity that participates in the proceeding, including evidence
presented by the Commission's staff; and
[to top of second column] |
(E)
any evidence presented by any State or federal governmental entity
as to how the proposed pipeline will affect the security, stability,
and reliability of energy.
In its written order, the Commission shall address all of the
evidence presented, and if the order is contrary to any of the
evidence, the Commission shall state the reasons for its
determination with regard to that evidence.
In Logan County there is a group that is actively campaigning
against CO2 pipeline construction in our community. The group is
basing their case on several of the above-mentioned items. There are
concerns that the presence of the pipeline will have a negative
impact on land values, on population, and economic development. They
have also voiced concerns about pipeline ruptures which do happen.
Darren Schempp presented a case against the pipeline publicly
referring to an eruption in Mississippi in 2021 and the devastating
impact it had on that community. He based his argument on facts that
have been documented by various news sources including accounts from
people who experienced the event.
CO2 in the pipeline is a highly concentrated product that instantly
turns into an odorless gas when introduced back into the atmosphere.
That gas is heavier than the air we breathe, therefore it does not
rise and evaporate, but rather it stays at ground level and spreads.
As a result, the oxygen in the air is pushed up and replaced by the
gas. The gas is an asphyxiant that will move into the lungs and make
it impossible to breathe. At the right levels a person will become
unconscious, and death can occur.
In addition, the oxygen needed
by combustible engines such as in cars, trucks and emergency
vehicles is not available, and those vehicles will not run, making
it difficult for first responders to reach and assist those who are
in the line of the gas stream.
Additional concerns have been voiced by the group regarding the act
of sequestration. The concern is that the gas that is released into
an underground storage could move, and in that movement it could
contaminate water supplies.
These are valid concerns that the group is asking the county board
to act upon.
Other concerns that have been raised are regarding the actual
pipeline. There is a plan within the plan for emergency shut offs
that would stop the free flowing of product at a specific point if a
rupture were to occur. This would decrease the amount of gas
released into the atmosphere. The concern is about the frequency of
those shut offs along the pipeline, and how much gas could
potentially be released before the shut off was deployed.
At the same time, there are others who are thinking in another
direction.
At a public meeting, State Representative Bill Hauter said he was
still undecided on whether CO2 pipelines should be permitted in his
district. He said there are dangers, and he too is concerned about
the maintenance of the pipeline and the location of shut offs. He
said that right now there are too many vague answers and what he
would like is open, honest facts about the benefits and hazards of
CO2 pipelines.
But at the same time, he noted that whether it be via a pipeline or
a semi tanker or rail tanker, the fact is CO2 is going to be
transported and sequestered. And there are opportunities for
accidents and derailments that could again release toxic gas into
the atmosphere at the point of the incident. A disastrous train
derailment in Ohio earlier this year was noted as an example of what
can happen. In fact, according to an article published in February
of this year by Newsweek, there are more than 1,700 train
derailments in the United States each year.
According to Forbes Advisor in 2021 there were over 500,000 crashes
involving semi-trucks on our nation’s highways, and approximately 55
percent occurred on rural roads or two-lane highways. Approximately
one percent of those accidents involved hazardous chemicals. An
accident in the tiny town of Montrose in Effingham County in
September reflects this. Happening on a two-lane highway, the semi
involved in the accident was carrying Anhydrous Ammonia which is
also quite hazardous to humans when inhaled. There were no deaths
reported from the inhalation of the Anhydrous though the town was
evacuated for a time, and five people died in the crash.
So, what is the answer, should a pipeline be permitted in Logan
County? That is not for us to decide, it is reliant on the decisions
of government officials from state to county.
What is known is that the Logan County Board is keeping Carbon
Sequestration on the agenda for the Zoning and Economic Development
Committee. Logan County Board Chair Emily Davenport stated at the
September meeting of that committee that there will be more
discussion on the subject in the future. She also noted that she has
been contacted by several county board chairmen and all are keeping
in contact about how they are proceeding (in their counties). At the
October meeting of the committee the item remained tabled with
further discussion still pending.
|
