Carbon Sequestration 

Developing the Technology Base and Infrastructure to Enable 

Sequestration as a Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Option 

May 2005 

Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2005 

 United States Department of Energy • Office of Fossil Energy • National Energy Technology Laboratory
 

1 

A Message to our Stakeholders 

The United States Department of Energy’s (DOE) Carbon Sequestration Program continues to 

make progress toward its goals of lowering the cost of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and 

ensuring permanent and safe carbon storage. As sequestration technology has moved forward, 

the topic has attracted the interest of a wider community. These persons bring fresh 

perspectives, new ideas, and different expectations. The DOE welcomes these developments 

and is making the investment needed to accelerate the pace of technology progress. The 

following are highlights from the past year. 

• The Regional Carbon Sequestration 

Partnerships effort is progressing to Phase II. 

The first phase of the partnerships effort will end 

in June of 2005 as a clear success. Together the 

partnerships have established a national network 

of companies and professionals working to 

support sequestration deployments. They have 

created a carbon sequestration atlas for the 

United States, and have identified and vetted 

priority opportunities for sequestration field tests. 

The Phase II partnerships will build upon the 

Phase I effort. The Phase II solicitation, released 

in December of 2004, will provide up to $100 

million in Federal funds over 4 years, with each 

partnership expected to receive between $2 

million and $4 million per year. As in Phase I, 

each partnership will be required to provide at 

least 20 percent in cost-sharing over the duration 

of the project. More information about the Phase I partnerships is accessible through 

the document, “Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships: Phase I 

Accomplishments,” which can be downloaded from the NETL website 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/Carbon%20Sequestration/pubs/PhaseIAccomplishment.pdf

• A sustained investment in Core R&D is advancing the science. Three sample 

highlights from the last year: a more robust understanding of the full suite of 

mechanisms that can trap and immobilize CO2 within geologic formations has emerged; 

field tests conducted at the Weyburn and Frio sites demonstrate an improved ability to 

“see” injected CO2 in an underground formation and monitor its movement; and process 

engineering studies show that the combination of advanced amines and heat and 

pressure integration can reduce the steam use for amine post-combustion capture to as 

little at 1,200 Btu per pound of CO2 captured. The program’s project portfolio contains 

fact sheets and other information on a wide range of research activities. CD copies are 

available upon request and it can be downloaded from the NETL website 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/sequestration 

Carbon management has become an 

increasingly important element of 

our coal research program. Carbon 

sequestration – the capture and 

permanent storage of carbon dioxide 

– has emerged as one of the highest 

priorities in the Fossil Energy 

research program. 

Mark Maddox 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Fossil Energy 

March 16, 2005 
 

2 

• The non-CO2 GHG control area is moving forward. Developments include promising 

laboratory-scale results for a temperature swing technology for capturing minemouth 

methane and a newly initiated project that will investigate the use of untreated landfill 

gas for enhanced coal bed methane recovery. This year’s roadmap contains a separate 

table for non-CO2 greenhouse gas control pathways and goals. 

• The Program is proactively complying with environmental regulations. Projectlevel Environmental Assessments have been conducted under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the geologic sequestration field projects at Frio, 

Texas and Marshall County, West Virginia. Also under NEPA, a Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being conducted. In 2004 DOE hosted a 

series of public meetings in cities across the U.S. to explain the program’s plans and 

goals and hear feedback from citizens. DOE released a Public Scoping Document in 

October 2004. Later in 2005, DOE will publish a draft EIS and then conduct a second 

round of public meetings. Copies of the reports and more information about the NEPA 

process is available at http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/Carbon%20Sequestration/eis/index.html

• A global climate change curriculum is available. Recognizing the complexity of the 

Global Climate Change issue and the need to improve understanding of greenhouse gas 

mitigation options among the public, the Carbon Sequestration Program has funded a 

Global Climate Change curriculum for middle school students. Developed by the 

Keystone Center, the ten-day curriculum uses a variety of interesting and engaging 

activities to educate students on a range of topics including greenhouse gas science, the 

implications of day-to-day energy use choices, and the role of technology in mitigating 

GHG emissions. Group games, debates, and activities encourage children to consider 

the trade-offs among economics, social equity, and the environment. Teacher training 

sessions are held at National Science Teacher Association Conventions and at the 

Keystone Center and teachers throughout the country are using the curriculum in their 

classrooms. Building on the success of the middle school curriculum, a high school 

curriculum is currently under development. An online version of the curriculum is 

available at www.keystonecurriculum.org

Interaction with our stakeholders is critical to the success of the Sequestration Program. In 

2005 the Program plans to engage stakeholders in a variety of ways, including the Fourth 

Annual Conference on Carbon Sequestration, the Annual Project Merit Review Meeting, the 

NEPA process, the Phase II Regional Partnerships, the educational curriculum, and the monthly 

carbon sequestration newsletter. 

This document provides a vision of how to proceed with the development of carbon 

sequestration technology and is itself an important medium for engaging stakeholders. We 

invite readers to examine this document carefully and provide feedback to the contact persons 

listed on the back cover. Through a cooperative partnership of industry, academia, and 

government, we have the best chance of success in developing viable carbon sequestration 

options.
 

3 

Chapter 1. Global Climate Change and the Role of 

Carbon Sequestration 

Our modern economy and our associated quality of life – lighting, transportation, 

communications, heat and air conditioning – rely fundamentally on energy, and 85% of the 

energy consumed worldwide comes from the combustion of fossil fuels. 

For nearly the first century of widespread 

fossil fuel use people did not pay much 

attention to carbon dioxide (CO2) 

emissions. CO2 was regarded, correctly, 

as a natural part of the Earth’s atmosphere. 

However, sustained worldwide growth in 

population and economic activity have 

increased anthropogenic CO2 emissions to 

the point where they are beginning to 

stress the natural carbon cycle. That is, 

more CO2 is being exhausted than can be 

taken up by trees, grasses, and the 

oceans, and the excess is accumulating in 

the atmosphere. The concentration of CO2

in the atmosphere is increasing at a rate of 

about 1-2 parts per million (ppm) per year. 

As shown in Figure 1, it is currently around 

378 ppm, up 35% from the pre-industrial 

level of 280 ppm. 

Elevated amounts of atmospheric CO2 have two primary effects that are of concern to scientists. 

First, CO2 in the atmosphere exerts a greenhouse effect that traps solar energy within the 

earth’s ecosystem. An increased amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may warm 

the planet overall and could cause unwelcome changes in regional climates. Second, increased 

CO2 in the atmosphere causes an increased rate of CO2 dissolution into ocean water which 

could make the oceans more acidic potentially causing damage to the ocean ecosystem. There 

is a great amount of uncertainty associated with the effects of greenhouse gas emissions and 

most of it centers on feedbacks. That is, how the earth’s ecosystem will respond to increased 

atmospheric CO2. A negative feedback pushes CO2 back to its pre-industrial equilibrium value. 

For example, increased CO2 in the atmosphere will cause trees to grow faster. Positive 

feedbacks are the opposite, for example increased global temperature may cause a polar 

tundra to thaw and release CO2 in the atmosphere which increases the global temperature 

further and thaws more tundra in a spiraling effect. 

Developing an understanding of the global climate, the carbon cycle, and the effects of 

atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs) is being pursued as a priority by the Administration 

through the U.S. Climate Change Science Program. In parallel the Administration is pursuing 

“transformational” technologies that provide traditional energy services (electricity, heat, 

transportation) without net greenhouse gas emissions or with very low greenhouse gas 

emissions. Carbon sequestration has emerged as a key technology option for GHG mitigation, 

200

220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

400

1740 1765 1790 1815 1840 1865 1890 1915 1940 1965 1990 2015 2040

Year

Atmospheric CO2 Concentration 

(parts per million)

Data sources: Ice core data obtained at the Siple Station, published 

by Friedli et al., 1986; Data from the Mauna Loa Observatory 

obtained from the NOAA web page.

Atmospheric 

Measurement 

(Mauna Loa, Hawaii)

Ice Core Data

(West Antarctica)

Figure 1. Atmospheric CO2
 

4 

alongside improved efficiency and non-carbon energy sources such as wind, biomass, hydroelectric, nuclear fission, and nuclear fusion. As a voluntary framework for progress, President 

Bush set forth the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI) in March of 2001. The GCCI sets a 

goal of an 18% reduction in the GHG intensity of the United States economy to be achieved by 

2012. In 2012 an assessment will be conducted, and the DOE Carbon Sequestration Program 

seeks to have viable commercial options at that time that could potentially impact the GCCI 

reassessment. 

Carbon sequestration is the capture and storage of CO2 and other greenhouse gases that would 

otherwise be emitted to the atmosphere. The greenhouse gases can be captured at the point of 

emission, or they can be removed from the air. The captured gases can be used, stored in 

underground reservoirs or possibly the deep oceans, absorbed by trees, grasses, soils, and 

algae, or converted to rock-like mineral carbonates or other products. There are a wide range 

of sequestration possibilities to be explored, but a clear priority for near-term deployments is to 

capture a stream of CO2 from a large, stationary emission point source and sequester it in an 

underground formation. 

Carbon sequestration holds the potential to provide deep reductions in greenhouse gas 

emissions. Currently, a little less than half of total U.S. GHG emissions are large point sources 

of CO2, Figure 2, and trends toward decarbonization of transportation fuels are increasing the 

amount of upstream CO2 emissions. Research is ongoing to develop a clearer picture of 

domestic geologic sequestration storage capacity, but it is apparent that domestic formations 

have at least enough capacity to store several centuries worth of point source emissions. 

Technologies aimed at capturing and utilizing methane emissions from energy production and 

conversion systems fall within the definition of carbon sequestration and will reduce non-CO2

greenhouse gas emissions. Mobile and dispersed GHG emissions can be offset by enhanced 

carbon uptake in terrestrial ecosystems, and research into CO2 conversion and other advanced 

sequestration concepts will expand the range of sequestration further. 

CO2, 

Transportation 

(27%) 

CO2, Industrial 

(15%) 

CO2, Other 

(10%) 

CO2, Electric Power 

(33%) 

Nitrous Oxide (4.5%)

Methane (8.5%) 

HGWP* (2%)

Source: DOE Energy Information Administration

Total 2003 U.S. GHG emissions were 6,891 million metrics tons CO2 equivalent. 

Methane, Nitrous oxide, and HGWPs reported in 100 year forcing CO2 equivalents 

* High global warming potential gases, e.g., certain refrigerants. 

Figure 2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States, 2003 

Roughly half of current GHG 

emissions are large CO2 point 

sources in the power and 

industrial sectors that are 

amenable to capture and 

storage. Trends toward decarbonization of transportation 

fuels will increase the 

percentage of future GHG 

emissions amenable to capture.
 

5 

DOE and the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) have conducted analyses of 

energy supply and use in the United States to gauge both the need for carbon sequestration 

technology under a GHG emissions stabilization scenario and the ability of potential CO2

sources and sinks to meet the need should it arise. 

Figure 3 summarizes the results of that analysis. The top line on the left graphic in Figure 3 is a 

reference case GHG emissions scenario. It contains significant technology development for low 

or no-carbon fuels and improved efficiency, but no direct incentives for GHG emissions 

reduction. The lower line in Figure 3 is an emissions stabilization scenario. It contains 

accelerated improvement in GHG intensity through 2012 and then gradually reduced emissions 

thereafter toward a goal of stabilizing emissions at the 2001 level. The emissions reduction 

requirement, which equals the gap between the two scenarios, grows to 5,300 million metric 

tons of carbon dioxide per year by 2050. Emissions stabilization is a first step toward 

atmospheric concentration stabilization. Atmospheric concentration stabilization will require 

emissions to be reduced to 80-90 percent below current levels. 

The right side of Figure 3 shows the contribution of various mitigation options needed to meet 

the gap under the emissions stabilization scenario. The contribution of each option has been 

estimated using an internal planning model that is based on cost/supply curves. The 

categories, “CO2 capture and storage” and “Hydrogen with sequestration” are directly 

dependent on research conducted by the DOE Sequestration Program. Together, they account 

for 45 percent of total emissions reduction in 2050 under the emissions stabilization scenario. 

Terrestrial ecosystems and non-CO2 GHG emissions control, which are being pursued by the 

DOE Sequestration Program in concert with other public and private partners, contribute 

another 15 percent. Clearly, carbon sequestration technology will play a pivotal role should 

GHG stabilization be deemed necessary. 

Figure 3. U.S. GHG Emissions Scenarios . . . and Technologies to Fill the Gap 

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2004 2012 2025 2050

GHG emissions reduction (MMmtCO2/yr)

Hydrogen w/ sequestration

CO2 capture and storage

Non-CO2 GHGs

Forestation and Agriculture

Efficiency and Renewables

Reductions rely directly 

on sequestration R&D

Reductions partially 

reliant on sequestration 

R&D

Reductions do not 

depend on sequestration 

R&D, but do include 

power plant efficiency 

gains

-

3,000

6,000

9,000

12,000

15,000

1990 2010 2030 2050

U.S. GHG Emissions

MMmtCO2eq/yr

reference case GHG 

emissions scenario

GHG emissions 

stabilization at the 

2001 level

by 2050 the gap 

equals 5,300 

MMmtCO2/yr 
 

6 

Chapter 2. Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap 

 and Program Plan 

Recognizing the importance of carbon sequestration, the 

U.S. DOE established the Carbon Sequestration Program 

in 1997. The Program, which is administered within the 

Office of Fossil Energy by the National Energy Technology 

Laboratory, seeks to move sequestration technologies 

forward so that their potential can be realized and they can 

play a major role in meeting any future greenhouse gas 

emissions reduction needs. The Program directly 

implements the President’s GCCI, as well as several 

National Energy Policy goals targeting the development of 

new technologies. It also supports the goals of the 

Framework Convention on Climate Change and other 

international collaborations to reduce greenhouse gas 

intensity and greenhouse gas emissions. 

This document, the 2005 Carbon Sequestration 

Technology Roadmap and Program Plan, identifies 

research pathways that lead to commercially viable sequestration systems and sets forth a plan 

of action for sequestration research. The information is organized into three sections: 

A. Core R&D is the laboratory, pilot plant, and field work aimed at developing new 

technologies and new systems for GHG mitigation. 

B. Infrastructure Development is the groundwork for future carbon sequestration 

deployments being developed through the Phase I and Phase II Regional 

Partnership efforts. 

C. Program Management is the program’s approach to R&D management: 

industry/government partnerships, cost-sharing, education and outreach, and 

environmental compliance. 

Table 1 is a top-level roadmap for core R&D and infrastructure development. It shows progress 

toward the metrics for success achieved over the past year. The metrics and goals for CO2

capture research are focused on reducing the cost and energy penalty because analysis shows 

that CO2 capture drives the cost of sequestration systems. Similarly, the goals and metrics for 

carbon storage and measurement, monitoring, and mitigation (MM&V) are focused on 

permanence and safety. All three research areas work toward the overarching program goal of 

90% CO2 capture with 99% storage permanence at less than a 10% increase in the cost of 

energy services by 2012.

VISION STATEMENT 

To possess the scientific 

understanding of carbon 

sequestration options, and to 

provide cost-effective, 

environmentally-sound 

technologies that ultimately 

lead to a reduction in 

greenhouse gas intensity and 

stabilization of 

overall atmospheric 

concentrations of CO2. 
7

Table 1. Top-level Carbon Sequestration Roadmap 

Metrics for Success Pathways 

2007 2012 

P

CO2 Capture 

• Post-combustion • Pre-combustion • Oxy-fuel 

Develop at least two capture technologies that each result in less than a 20% increase in cost of energy services. 

Develop at least two capture technologies that each result in less than a 10% increase in cost of energy services. 

Heat and pcombined reduced stcombustio

Sequestration/ Storage 

• Hydrocarbon bearing geologic 

formations 

• Saline formations • Tree plantings, silvicultural 

practices, and soil reclamation 

• Increased ocean uptake 

Field tests provide improved understanding of the factors affecting permanence and capacity in a broad range of CO2 storage 

reservoirs. 

Demonstrate ability to predict CO2

storage capacity with +/-30% accuracy. Demonstrate enhanced CO2

trapping at pre-commercial scale. 

More robutrapping awater havcapacity e

Monitoring, Mitigation, &Verification 

• Advanced soil carbon 

measurement 

• Remote sensing of above-ground 

CO2 storage and leaks 

• Detection and measurement of CO2

in geologic formations 

• Fate and transport models for CO2

in geologic formations 

Demonstrate advanced CO2

measurement and detection technologies at sequestration field tests and commercial deployments. 

CO2 material balance greater than 

99%. MM&V protocols enable 95% of stored CO2 to be credited as net 

emissions reduction. 

Test of timWeyburn detect volmetric tonformation

Breakthrough Concepts 

• Advanced CO2 capture • Advanced subsurface technologies • Advanced geochemical 

sequestration 

• Novel niches 

Laboratory scale results from 1-2 of the current breakthrough concepts show promise to reach the goal of a 10% or less increase in the cost of energy, and are advanced to the pilot scale. 

Technology from the program’s portfolio revolutionizes the possibilities for CO2 capture, 

storage, or conversion. 

Seven awsolicitatiothe Nationwere mad

Non-CO2

GHGs 

• Minemouth methane 

capture/combustion 

• Landfill gas recovery 

Deployment of cost-effective methane capture systems. 

Commercial deployment of at least two technologies from the R&D program. 

Promising temperatufor methan

Infrastructure Development 

• Sequestration atlases • Project implementation plans • Regulatory compliance • Outreach and education 

Phase II partnerships have pursued priority sequestration opportunities identified in Phase I and have conducted successful field tests. 

Projects pursued by the Regional Partnerships contribute to the 2012 assessment under GCCI. 

Data on Cand sinks available (www.natPhase II aend of FY 
 

8 

A. Core R&D

The goal of the core R&D program is to advance sequestration science and develop to the point 

of pre-commercial deployment new sequestration technologies and approaches. The core 

program is a portfolio of work including cost-shared, industry-led technology development 

projects, research grants, and research conducted in-house at NETL. The core program is 

divided into the following five areas. 

1. CO2 Capture 

2. Carbon Storage 

3. Monitoring, Mitigation, and Verification (MM&V) 

4. Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Control 

5. Breakthrough Concepts 

6. Field Projects 

The first three core research areas track the life cycle of a carbon sequestration system. That 

is, first CO2 is captured, second it is stored or converted to a benign or useful carbon-based 

product, and third, the stored or converted CO2 is monitored to ensure that it remains 

sequestered and appropriate mitigation actions are taken as needed. The fourth category, nonCO2 greenhouse gas control, involves primarily the capture and reuse of methane emissions 

from energy production and conversion systems. The fifth area, breakthrough concepts, is a 

group of projects along the same general approach as the first four research areas, but with a 

higher technical uncertainty and the potential to expand the applicability of carbon sequestration 

beyond conventional point source emissions. Field projects are a verification of promising 

technologies across all areas and often involve the integration of more than one area. The 

goals and activities within each area are described in the pages that follow. 

1. CO2 Capture. CO2 exhausted from fossil fuel-fired energy systems is typically either too 

dilute, at too low a pressure, or too contaminated with impurities to be directly stored or 

converted to a stable, carbon-based product. The aim of CO2 capture research is to produce a 

CO2-rich stream at pressure. The research is categorized into three pathways: postcombustion, pre-combustion, and oxyfuels. Post combustion refers to capturing CO2 from a flue 

gas after a fuel has been combusted in air. Pre-combustion refers to a process where a 

hydrocarbon fuel is gasified to form a mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide and CO2 is 

captured from the synthesis gas before it is combusted. Oxyfuel is an approach where a 

hydrocarbon fuel is combusted in pure or nearly pure oxygen rather than air, which exhausts a 

mixture of CO2 and water which can easily produce pure CO2. 

Each of the three pathways has merit. Post-combustion capture applies to over 98% of current 

fossil fuel utilization assets, but it represents a significant technology challenge in that the CO2

in flue gas is dilute (3-15 vol%), at low-pressure (15-25 psi), and often contaminated with traces 

of sulfur and particulate matter. A pre-combustion synthesis gas contains CO2 in higher 

concentration (30-50 vol%), higher pressure (200-500 psi), and with less contaminants, but 

there are few gasification-based power systems currently in operation. Oxyfuel combustion 

requires roughly three times more oxygen per net kWh of power generation compared to 

gasification, and its efficiency is further compromised by the large amounts of flue gas that must 

be recycled to the combustion chamber for temperature control. However, oxyfuel does have a 

key advantage in that it can offer near 100% CO2 capture. A breakthrough in membranes or 

chemical looping technology for oxygen delivery could dramatically change its prospects. 
 

9 

Table 2 presents a technology roadmap for CO2 capture with performance goals that the 

Program has identified. The high partial pressure of CO2 in synthesis gas allows for a wider 

range of pathways for pre-combustion. As shown in the table there are significant cross-cutting 

technology development areas which will enhance all CO2 capture pathways. Table 2 also 

presents a set of technology performance goals identified by the program which, if achieved, 

provide a progression toward broad commercial viability of carbon sequestration. 

The Program essentially accomplished its 2004 capture goal. American Air Liquide and 

Babcock & Wilcox performed oxycombustion experiments on a 1.5 MW pilot scale boiler and 

demonstrated a 70% reduction in CO2 recycle per coal burned compared to a conventional 

70/30 CO2/oxygen base case. 

Table 2. CO2 Capture Roadmap

Technology Roadmap Program Goals 

CO2 Capture 

Applications 

Priority Research 

Pathways 

Cross Cut 

Pathways Reduce cost and parasitic load 

Post-Combustion 

CO2 capture 

Chemical sorbents 

 

Pre-Combustion 

CO2 capture 

Chemical sorbents 

Physical sorbents 

Membranes 

Water/CO2 hydrates 

Oxyfuels Oxygen/recycle flue gas 

boilers 

Chemical looping 

Heat integration 

Improved base process efficiency 

Oxygen separation technology 

Gas/liquid contacting 

Integration of CO2 capture with 

NOx/SOx/Hg/PM control 

2004 Pilot-scale demo of 75% 

reduction in CO2 recycle requirements. 

*GOAL MET

2007 Develop at least two capture 

technologies that each result in less than 

a 20% increase in cost of energy services. 

2012 Develop at least four capture 

technologies that each result in less than 

a 10% increase in cost of energy services 

Table 3 presents a technology-centered analysis of CO2 capture methods. In this framework 

CO2 capture is divided into three sub-categories: CO2 removal, CO2 separation, and oxygen 

combustion. Each is defined as follows. 

• CO2 removal, bringing a CO2-containing stream into contact with a compound that 

selectively captures a portion of the CO2 

• CO2 Separation, the use of membranes to increase the concentration of a CO2-

containing stream 

• Oxygen combustion, combustion of a fossil fuel with pure or highly pure oxygen to 

exhaust undiluted CO2

Table 4 presents a list of projects currently being funded by the Carbon Sequestration Program, 

each categorized into the pathways contained in Table 3. Other programs within the Office of 

Fossil Energy are funding research in technologies related to CO2 capture and those are not 

shown here. Table 4 presents a robust research portfolio. Links to web pages with more 

detailed information are provided for many of the projects. 
 

10 
 

11 

2. Carbon Storage. Carbon storage is defined as the placement of CO2 into a repository in 

such a way that it will remain stored (or sequestered) permanently. It includes three distinct 

sub-areas: geologic sequestration, terrestrial sequestration, and ocean sequestration. Each is 

described below, and Table 5 presents a synopsis of the carbon storage pathways and program 

goals. 

CO2 storage in geologic formations. The storage of CO2 in a geologic formation 

(geosequestration) is the injection of CO2 into an underground formation that has the capability 

to contain it securely. There are three categories of formations, each with different challenges 

and opportunities for CO2 storage. 

Oil and gas reservoirs. An oil or gas reservoir is a formation of porous rock that has held 

crude oil or natural gas (both of which are buoyant underground like CO2) over geologic 

timeframes. It thus has a “demonstrated seal,” and is fundamentally an ideal setting for 

CO2 storage. The attractiveness of oil and gas reservoirs is often enhanced by the fact 

that injected CO2 can enable the production of oil and gas resources left behind by primary 

recovery and water flood. A challenge is that well-known oil and gas fields have been 

drilled into extensively. Earlier wells were not sealed to today’s high standards when they 

were abandoned, and most abandoned wells, old and recent, are plugged with Portland 

cement which is susceptible to corrosion from saline water with dissolved CO2. 

Saline formations. A saline formation is a formation of porous rock that is overlain by one 

or more impermeable rock formations and thus has the potential to trap injected CO2. It is 

similar to an oil or gas formation with the exception that it has not actually held oil or gas 

over geologic time frames. Saline formations lack a demonstrated seal and do not offer 

the possibility for enhanced oil or gas production, but they have the advantage that they 

have not been penetrated by as many wells as oil and gas reservoirs. 

Deep coal seams. CO2 injected into a coal bed becomes adsorbed onto the coal’s 

surfaces and is sequestered. Most coals contain adsorbed methane, and this methane 

can be recovered from coals that are too deep or too thin to mine economically. Coals 

preferentially adsorb CO2 and, like enhanced oil recovery, CO2 can be injected into an 

unmineable coal formation to enable recovery of residual methane not produced by depressuring. A challenge is that coals increase in volume when they adsorb CO2, and coal 

swelling reduces permeability. 

Saline formations are more commonplace than oil and gas formations or coal seams and, on 

the basis of total pore volume, saline formations offer the potential capacity to store hundreds of 

years worth of CO2 emissions. Saline formations are the primary option for geosequestration 

should substantial storage capacity be needed in the future.
12

Table 5. Carbon Storage Roadmap

Technology Roadmap Supporting Program Ac

Current 

State of the Art 

Priority Research 

Pathways 

Cross Cut 

Pathways 

R&D 

Highlights 

Ens

ec

Geologic Sequestration 32 million tons of CO2 per year are 

injected into depleting oil reservoirs in the U.S. as a part of enhanced oil operations, 10% is from anthropogenic sources. Current Commercial-scale geologic sequestration projects include: 

Sleipner(Norway, Statoil, 1996, 1 MMtCO2/yr) Weyburn(Canada, ENCANA, 2000, 1.5 MMtCO2/yr) In Salah(Algeria, BP, 2004, 1.2 MMtCO2/yr) 

Geologic formations  Depleting oil reservoirs  Unmineable coal seams  Saline formations  Depleting gas reservoirs  Organically-rich shales Trapping mechanisms  Structural containment  Capillary trapping  Dissolution in saline water  Mineralization  Adsorption on coal 

Capability to predict CO

2 storage capacity 

Injection techniques to enhance CO

2

contact within a reservoir, preserve 

formation integrity, permeability 

CO

2-impermeable well bores 

Completed an environmental assessment for CO2 injection near Houston, TX, 

including a robust model of the injection site. Successfully injected 1,600 tons of CO2 into a saline formation. A CO2 ECBM field test at Tiffany, NM, 

demonstrated recovery of 1 scf of CBM per 3 scf CO2 sequestered. 

Initiated a research project in which landfill gas will be injected into an unmineable coal bed to achieve methane/CO2 separation, enhance CBM 

recovery, and sequester carbon. 

2007 Conduct a 

injectivity is mainmitigate the nega

2008 Develop an mechanisms acrosaline formations2009 Initiate at lCO2 storage (>1 m

formation to demcompatibility to C

storage capacity, 

trapping. 2012 CO2 storag

±30%. 

Terrestrial Sequestration There are currently over 20,000 acres of forestland in the United States dedicated specifically to sequestering CO2. 

The United States has 1.5 million acres of land damaged by past mining practices. 

Planting trees instead of grass on mine land Soil reclamation using CCBs or other solid residuals No-till farming, aforestation, and other activities applied to a wide range of geographies to increase carbon uptake 

Enhanced carbon 

transfer from plant to 

soil 

Achieved 80% survival rate for tree plantings in both damaged land amended with flue gas desulfurization sludge (Paradise, KY) and in formerly compacted mineland (Hazard, KY). 

2007 Develop oppractice guidelinesequestration pot2008 Develop to systems for advangreenhouse gases health and cost no carbon sequestere

Ocean Sequestration No commercial deployments. Unknown ecosystem impacts. Enormous potential. 

Ocean injection 

Deep injection technology 

Use of hydrates to increase permanence 

Ocean fertilization 

Enhanced 

understanding 

& 

speculative 

technologies 

An experiment conducted at a natural CO2 vent in the ocean showed that fish 

can sense and avoid a plume of entrained CO2. Laboratory tests have shown that premixing CO2 and water prior to 

injection creates hydrates that are more dense than ocean water and sink upon injection. 

Improved scienti
 

13 

CO2 trapping within a geologic formation. Of emerging importance in the field of 

geosequestration is the science of maximizing CO2 trapping mechanisms. At the temperatures 

and pressures of most underground formations (100 to 150 o

F, 2,000 to 3,000 psi) CO2 exists as 

a supercritical fluid - it has the density near that of a liquid but the viscosity near that of a gas. 

Supercritical CO2 is lighter than the saline water in the formation and exhibits a strong tendency 

to flow upward. The primary method for trapping CO2 is by a layer or “cap” of impermeable rock 

that overlies the formation of porous rock into which the CO2 is injected and prevents upward 

flow of CO2. It is called structural trapping and is the mechanism that caused natural deposits of 

crude oil, natural gas and CO2. Four other mechanisms for CO2 trapping described below can 

enhance the permanence of CO2 storage within a geologic formation. Figure 4 shows how 

these advanced trapping mechanisms can apply in a typical CO2 injection scenario. 

 

1. Capillary trapping. The surface of sandstone and other rocks preferentially adheres to 

saline water over CO2. If there is enough saline water within a pore (75-90% of the pore 

volume), it will form a capillary plug that traps the residual CO2 within the pore space. 

2. Dissolution in saline water. CO2 is soluble in saline water. As it comes in contact with 

the saline water it dissolves into solution. 

3. Mineralization. Over longer periods of time (thousands of years), dissolved CO2 reacts 

with minerals to form solid carbonates. 

4. Adsorption of CO2. Coal and other organically-rich reservoirs will preferably adsorb CO2

onto carbon surfaces as a function of reservoir pressure. 

These advanced trapping mechanisms are only effective to the degree CO2 comes into contact 

with the rock or coal within a formation. New injection techniques are being developed to 

maximize CO2 contact within the reservoir. For example, accurate reservoir characterization 

can reveal the location of high permeability zones and enable placement of wells that force CO2

flow through low permeability areas. Also, horizontal wells can enable multiple injection points 

along the bottom of a porous rock formation greatly increasing the lateral distribution of CO2. 

Lateral distribution of CO2 can also be enhanced through engineered fracturing of the rock. 

Several advanced drilling and injection techniques are shown in Figure 5. 

A layer of mobile 

CO2 gathers below 

the impermeable 

rock layer and 

migrates laterally

CO2 in rock 

pores trapped by 

capillary forces

Captured 

CO2

CO2 dissolved into 

saline water w/in 

contact zone

CO2 Injection point

Figure 4. CO2 Storage Mechanisms

A layer of mobile 

the impermeable 

migrates laterally

CO2 in rock 

pores trapped by 

capillary forces

Captured 

CO2

CO2 dissolved into 

saline water w/in 

contact zone

CO2 Injection point
 

14 

Directional or horizontal drilling enables multiple 

injection points from one well and broad lateral 

distribution of injected CO2. In a cost shared project 

with NETL, CONSOL will test/demonstrate the 

injection of CO2 into an unmineable coal seam using 

a directional drilling technique. 

In the figure to the left five CO2 injection wells (red) are 

positioned around the perimeter of a domed natural 

gas-bearing formation. CO2 injected into the formation 

is drawn laterally toward the middle of the dome by the 

low pressure zone created by the natural gas recovery 

wells (blue). As it moves the CO2 pushes residual 

natural gas toward the production wells, enhancing 

recovery. BP is testing this type of injection strategy in 

its In Salah project in Algeria. 

Figure 5. Examples of Advanced Drilling and CO2 Injection Techniques 

Hydrostatic pressure applied to a conventional 

vertical well can be used to engineer fractures in the 

rock that enable greater horizontal distribution of 

injected CO2. 

In the figure to the left a patented pinnate horizontal 

well network is built from one surface well with 

multiple lateral diversions. The main stem can be up 

to 1,500 meters long with the offshoots offering a total 

of 9,000 meters of well length. A pinnate well network 

can produce 80% of coal bed methane in place within 

3-4 years, and over 500 pinnate wells are currently in 

use worldwide for primary coal bed methane 

recovery. There is a possible opportunity to inject 

CO2 into a pinnate network for storage after CBM 

production. 
 

15 

Terrestrial sequestration. Terrestrial sequestration is the enhancement of CO2 uptake by 

plants that grow on land and in freshwater, and carbon storage in soils. Tree-plantings, no-till 

farming, forest preservation and other early activities provide an opportunity for low-cost CO2

emissions offsets. More advanced research includes the development of fast-growing trees and 

grasses and deciphering the genomes of carbon-storing soil microbes. Responsibility for 

terrestrial sequestration research is shared by many Federal agencies, and the program 

coordinates its activities in this area with the DOE Office of Science, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, and Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining. 

One area of focus for the DOE’s core sequestration R&D Program is in developing field 

practices for increasing carbon uptake in mined lands. With the passage of the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 coal mine operators have moved away from reforestation 

of minelands in favor of compaction and grass planting. Compaction of the soil prevents tree 

growth because the roots need loose soil to grow in. The program is funding small field 

experiments with reforesting mineland, both planting trees on new, uncompacted minelands and 

ripping up compacted land and planting trees. The theory that a forest will provide increased 

carbon uptake per acre relative to grass lands is being tested in the field experiments and the 

cost per incremental ton of carbon stored estimated. The core program is also experimenting 

with the use of coal combustion by-products as soil amendments to repair damaged land. 

Ocean sequestration. Ocean 

sequestration is examining methods that 

could potentially increase the carbon uptake 

of the oceans. One way to achieve 

increased ocean uptake is to enhance the 

growth of plants in the surface ocean, and a 

few years ago there was interest in the idea 

of fertilizing tracts of the oceans to increase 

algae growth. A field test revealed problems 

with fertilizer distribution and with the plant 

material decomposing to CO2 in the surface 

ocean and being released back to the 

atmosphere. 

The other option for ocean sequestration is 

to inject CO2 into ocean water. The full 

extent of environmental risks associated with 

ocean injection are largely unknown at this 

time and injected CO2 may not remain 

permanently sequestered. The core 

program is funding a limited amount of 

research in this area with the goal of better 

understanding the risks of ocean 

sequestration. As shown in Figure 6, the 

Program is also exploring methods to 

increase the storage permanence of injected 

CO2 and to minimize its contact with the 

ocean ecosystems, including the formation 

of CO2/water hydrates and mineral 

carbonates. 

Coflow 

injector tip 

Sinking 

composite 

particle 

Figure 6. Injection of CO2 Hydrate in Ocean 

Water 1,200 Meters Below the Surface. 

The Monterey Bay Aquarium Research 

Institute (MBARI) has been conducting small 

scale experiments where liquid CO2 is 

injected into ocean water (50 ml per minute). 

One of the goals of the experiments is to 

optimize the formation of dense CO2/water 

hydrates. These hydrates sink in deep ocean 

water and provide a greater residence time 

for injected CO2. Another goal is to develop 

and test instruments to “see” the injected CO2

in situ and monitor its effects on ocean water, 

for example Raman spectroscopy. 

Source: C. Tsouris, P. Brewer, E. Adams et 

al.; Jan 2005.
 

16 

3. Monitoring, Mitigation, and Verification (MM&V). Monitoring and verification 

are defined as the capability to measure the amount of CO2 stored at a specific sequestration 

site, monitor the site for leaks or other deterioration of storage integrity over time, and to verify 

that the CO2 is stored in a way that is permanent and not harmful to the host ecosystem. 

Mitigation is the capability to respond to CO2 leakage or ecological damage in the unlikely event 

that it should occur. MM&V is broken into two categories (1) geologic sequestration and (2) 

terrestrial sequestration. This structure is changed from the 2004 roadmap to reflect the 

fundamental differences in the suite of technology pathways for MM&V for terrestrial 

ecosystems versus geologic formations. Research activities in both areas are closely 

coordinated with the associated work in carbon storage. In addition to ensuring effective and 

safe storage, MM&V provides information and feedback that is useful in improving and refining 

storage field practices. Ocean sequestration is in an earlier stage of development and does not 

yet have an MM&V component. Table 6 shows goals and research pathways for geologic and 

terrestrial MM&V. Each area is described below.

MM&V technologies for CO2 storage in geologic formations. Monitoring and 

verification for geosequestration contains three components: 

Modeling. Modeling is the understanding of the forces that influence the behavior of CO2 in 

a reservoir, and the simulation of that understanding in a computer program that enables 

one to predict the fate and transport of injected CO2. Modeling is important due to the very 

fundamental fact that a geosequestration project operator will need to prove with a high 

degree of confidence that injected CO2 will remain securely stored before injection is 

allowed to commence. Modeling is a complex undertaking that involves the flow of CO2

through heterogeneous rock; dissolution, capillary trapping, chemical reactions; and the 

impact of the CO2 plume and increased pressure on the formation cap rock. The boundary 

of a robust CO2 storage model is not limited to the target formation, but also includes fugitive 

paths that CO2 may travel up to the surface. The program seeks to acquire the data needed 

to support the models (e.g., chemical reaction kinetics, and two and three phase vapor/liquid 

equilibrium data at super critical conditions) and to develop integrated models that support 

the needs of planned field tests. 

Plume tracking. Plume tracking is the ability to “see” the injected CO2 and its behavior. 

Seismic has risen up as a key technology in this area. Supercritical CO2 is more 

compressible than saline water and sound waves travel through it at a different velocity. 

Thus free CO2 in a saline formation leaves a bright seismic signature, as seen at the 

Weyburn and Frio field tests, Figure 7. Observation wells are another important source of 

information for plume tracking. 

Leak detection. CO2 leak detection systems will serve as a backstop for modeling and 

plume tracking. The first challenge for leak detection is the need to cover large areas. The 

CO2 plume from an injection of 1 million tons CO2 per year in a saline formation for twenty 

years could be spread over a horizontal area of 15 square miles or more. The second 

challenge is to separate out CO2 leaks from the varying fluxes of natural CO2 respiration. 

There are important interconnections among the three areas. For example, data from plume 

tracking enables validation of reservoir models. On the other hand a robust reservoir model 

enable operators to better interpret data from plume tracking. Models and plume tracking 

combine to help focus leak detection efforts on high-risk areas. 
 

17 

Mitigation. If CO2 leakage occurs, steps can be taken to arrest the flow of CO2 and mitigate any 

negative impacts. Examples include lowering the pressure within the CO2 storage formation to 

reduce the driving force for CO2 flow and possibly reverse faulting or fracturing; forming a 

“pressure plug” by increasing the pressure in the formation into which CO2 is leaking; 

intercepting the CO2 leakage path; or plugging the region where leakage is occurring with low 

permeability materials using for example “controlled mineral carbonation” or “controlled 

formation of biofilms.” 

 

MM&V for terrestrial ecosystems. The area of MM&V for terrestrial ecosystems contains 

three components: 

Organic Matter Measurement. Conventional technologies for organic matter measurement 

(i.e., tree trunk diameter measurement and vegetation and soil samples) are too labor 

intensive for large-scale deployments. Advanced MM&V technologies such as arial 

videography rely on technology and can provide a significantly more robust site 

characterization at lower cost. Working with The Nature Conservancy the program is 

developing a next generation of satellite-based imaging technology. 

Soil Carbon Measurement. Soil carbon offers the potential for long-term secure storage. 

The program is developing automated technologies for measuring soil carbon. 

Modeling. Detailed models are used to extrapolate the results from random samples to an 

entire plot and to estimate the net increase in carbon storage relative to a case without 

enhanced uptake. Economic models show accumulations of emissions credits and 

revenues versus an initial investment. 

The figure above shows the results of a seismic assessment conducted at the Weyburn 

oil field in Saskatchewan, Canada. The horizontal lines are layers of sedimentary rock 

that were identified in a pre-injection baseline analysis of the formation. This seismic 

reading was taken after CO2 injection had begun, and the splotches of green and yellow 

show regions within the formation where sound waves travel through the rock at relatively 

slower speeds - a strong indication of the CO2 plume location. Source: PRTC, “IEA GHG 

Weybun CO2 Monitoring & Storage Project, 2000-2004 Report,” Sept., 2004. 

Figure 7. Time-lapse Seismic CO2 Monitoring Conducted at the Weyburn Field 
18

Table 6. MM&V Roadmap 

Technology Roadmap Supporting Program 

Pathways Cross-cut Pathways Research Highlights 

Geologic Formations 

Modeling  Reservoir models (CO2 flow from target to vadose) 

 Geochemical models  Geomechanical models Plume tracking  Surface to borehole seismic  Micro-seismic  Cross well tomography  Reservoir pressure monitoring  Observation wells/fluid sampling CO2 leak detection 

 Vadose zone soil/water sampling  Air sample/gas chromospectrometry  Infrared-based CO2 in air detectors 

 Vegetation growth rates  CO2 tracers, natural and introduced 

 Well testing  Sub-surface monitoring wells Mitigation  De-pressure target formation  Pressure, permeability plug  Interception, pump and treat 

3D seismic tests conducted at the Weyburn field show the ability to detect volumes of CO2 within the 

geologic formation as small as 2,500 metric tons. Completed a rigorous flow model of CO2 injection into the Frio Saline 

Formation. Completed a micro-gravimetric survey of Sleipner Utsira saline formation.

Terrestrial Ecosystems 

Modeling  Above/below ground correlations  Cash flow models of terrestrial sequestration Plant matter measurement 

Multi-spectral 3-dimensional ariel digital imagery Satellite imagery Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) 

Soil carbon measurement 

Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) Inelastic Neutron Scattering Soil Carbon Analyzer 

Integrated flow, geochemical, and geomechanical models 

Ecosystem response models 

Model use to focus monitoring on higher-risk leakage areas 

Risk analysis protocols 

Protocols for using advanced MM&V technologies in commercial systems Completed flyovers of the Delta National Forest in Mississippi to measure carbon storage. Complete construction and testing of person portable LIBS. 

Complete calibrations of scanning system.

2tsc2e

tcts2

g2e

ic
 

19 

4. Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Control. Because non-CO2 greenhouse gases (e.g., 

methane, N2O, and high global warming potential gases) can have significant economic value, 

emissions can often be captured or avoided at relatively low net cost. The Sequestration 

Program is focused on fugitive methane emissions where non-CO2 greenhouse gas abatement 

is integrated with energy production, conversion, and use. Landfill gas and coal mine methane 

are two priority opportunities. Landfill gas is typically half methane, half CO2, with small 

amounts of heavier hydrocarbons. Technologies include end-of-pipe separations to concentrate 

the methane, and landfill engineering to produce a more useful gas stream over a shorter period 

of time. Coal mine methane is much more dilute (0.3 – 1.5% methane in air) and represents a 

larger challenge. Methane can be captured for use or oxidized to CO2 which has a much lower 

GHG effect per molecule. Table 7 presents a roadmap for non-CO2 GHG control research and 

several projects funded by the Program. 

Table 7. Non-CO2 GHG Roadmap 

Technology Pathway Supporting Research Projects Program Goals 

Landfill Gas 

Methane/nitrous oxide 

generation control 

Water management 

Microbe management 

Methane/CO2 separation 

Bacterial oxidation of CH4 and 

N2O 

Use of landfill gas for ECBM 

Methane recovery from landfills [Yolo 

County Planning and Public Works 

Department] 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/

project/Proj199.pdf

Methodologies to minimize microbial 

production of nitrous oxide and maximize 

microbial consumption of methane in 

landfill cover soils [University of Michigan] 

Maximize biodegradation and minimize the 

formation of methane by controlled 

injection of air and liquids [University of 

Delaware] 

Design and test a landfill tarp impregnated 

with immobilized methane oxidizing 

bacteria [University of North Carolina] 

Injection of landfill gas into un-mineable 

coal seams [Kansas Geological Survey] 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/

project/Proj324.pdf

Coal Mine Methane 

Separation of methane in air at 

a concentration of 0.3-1.5 vol% 

Catalytic oxidation of methane 

in air at a concentration of 0.3-

1.5 vol% 

Catalytic combustion of minemouth 

methane 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/

project/Proj248.pdf

Nitrogen/methane separation via ultra-fast 

thermal swing adsorption 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/

project/Proj253.pdf 

2007 Effective deployment 

of cost-effective methane 

capture systems 

2012 Commercial 

deployment of at least two 

technologies from the 

R&D program 
 

20 

Chemical Looping 

Chemical looping is a “breakthrough” 

approach to fossil fuel conversion that has 

received significant attention. In a 

chemical looping process, oxygen for 

combustion is delivered to the fuel via a 

redox agent rather than by direct air or 

gaseous oxygen, providing the potential for 

high-efficiency fuel conversion and 

venting a high-purity CO2 exhaust at 

pressure. 

 

In 2004/2005 the Program explored 

chemical looping gasification concepts, 

where the redox agent supplies 

substoichiometric oxygen for gasification 

of fuel. These concepts are complex but 

offer the step change in efficiency 

associated with combined cycle power 

plant technology. 

5. Breakthrough Concepts. Breakthrough 

Concepts R&D is pursuing revolutionary and 

transformational sequestration approaches with 

potential for low cost, permanence, and large 

global capacity. These concepts are very 

speculative but have the potential to provide 

“leap frog” performance and cost improvements 

compared to existing technologies. 

CO2 conversion is an important part of the 

portfolio for Breakthrough Concepts. CO2 can be 

converted into benign solids to provide 

permanent storage or back to a hydrocarbon fuel 

to provide a regenerable energy system using 

carbon as the energy source. A guiding principal 

is to mimic and harness processes found in 

nature, for example, photosynthesis and mollusk 

shell formation. 

6. Field Projects. Field projects are an important part of the program’s technology 

development effort. Conditions in both terrestrial ecosystems and geologic formations are 

difficult to simulate, and so testing of ideas in the field often enables significant learning and 

insight. Sequestration field tests provide a test bed for CO2 detection and measurement 

technologies and also an opportunity to ground-truth models. Field tests also bring technology 

developers and communities together to address concerns about the environmental impacts of 

sequestration deployments and to determine the performance standards that must be met. 

Figure 8 presents a partial list of program-funded field tests in different stages of planning and 

execution.
21

JOHNSON COUNT

Y, KS

Lead: Kansas Geologic Survey 

Type: Geologic, coal seam 

Phase: Pre-injection 

Scale: TBD 

Highlights: Will explore the possibility of injecting 

untreated landfill gas (50/50 CO2/CH4) into a coal bed 

for both enhanced CBM recovery and landfill gas purification.

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj324.pdf

WEYBURN, CANADA

Lead: ENCANA 

Type: Geologic, Depleting oil reservoir 

Phase: Injection began in 2001 

Scale: 20 MM tons CO2 over 15 yrs 

Highlights: Demonstrate use of time lapse (3D) 

seismic and other technologies to monitor CO2. 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj282.pdfhttp://www.encana.com/operations/upstream/ca_weyburn.html

FRIO, TX 

Lead: University of Texas Bureau of Economic 

Geology 

Type: Geologic, Saline formation 

Phase: Post-injection 

Scale: 1,800 tons CO2 over 3 weeks 

Highlights: Developed a thorough Environmental 

Assessment under NEPA.

http://www.beg.utexas.edu/environqlty/co2seq/fieldexperiment.htm

SAN JUAN BASIN, NM 

Lead: Burlington Resources, 

Advanced Resources International Type: Geologic, coal seam 

Phase: Post-injection 

Scale: 280,000 tons CO2

over 6 years 

Highlights: Developed 

improved understanding of coal swelling and ability to predict CO2 storage 

capacity. http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj228.pdf

WEST PEARL QUEEN, NM 

Lead: Strata Production 

Type: Geologic, Depleting oil reservoir 

Phase: Post-injection 

Scale: 2,200 tons CO2 over 42 days 

Highlights: Tested tracer and seismic 

MM&V; examined alternative CO2

trapping mechanisms. 

MA

Le

Ty

Ph

pl

Sc

Hi

ho

up le

httenh

PARADISE

Lead: Ten

Type: Ter

Phase: Po

Scale: 100 

Highlights: 

maple pousing FGD 

with FGD 

http://www.n4.pdf

N

Le

Ty

Ph

Sc

H

peevin 

HAZA

Lead: 

Type: 

Phase

Scale: 

Highli

indiceincreasedimuncom

YOLO COUNTY, CA 

Lead: Yolo County Planning 

and Public Works Dept. 

Type: Non-CO2, LFG

Phase: Construction of test 

cells completed 

Scale: 12 acres 

Highlights: Seek to 

demonstrate LFG generation over 5-10 years as opposed to typical 10-30 years for 

more economical recovery. 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj199.pdf

Figure 8. Carbon Sequestration Field Projects 
 

22 

B. Infrastructure Development

Regional Partnerships 

DOE initiated seven Regional Carbon 

Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) in 

September of 2003 with the goal of developing 

an infrastructure to support and enable future 

carbon sequestration field tests and 

deployments. The first phase of the RCSPs will 

end in June of 2005 as a clear success. 

Together the partnerships have established a 

national network of companies and 

professionals working to support sequestration 

deployments, they have created a carbon 

sequestration atlas for the United States, and 

identified and vetted priority opportunities for 

sequestration field tests. Table 8 presents an 

overview of the Phase I partnerships. More 

information about them is accessible via the web 

links in Table 8 or through the document, 

“Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships: 

Phase I Accomplishments,” which can be 

downloaded from the NETL website 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/Carbon%20Sequestration/pubs/PhaseIAccomplishment.pdf 

 

In December 2004, DOE announced an open competitive solicitation for Phase II RCSPs. The 

Phase II partnerships will be four years in duration with an expected Federal funding per award 

of $2-4 million per year. Like Phase I, the Phase II awards require a minimum cost share of 

20%. Proposals were accepted on March 16, 2005 and awards are expected to be announced 

before the end of FY 2005. 

The primary and overarching objective of the Phase II Regional Partnerships will be to move 

forward with priority sequestration technology validation tests identified in the Phase I effort. 

Successful implementation of these tests will support the 2012 assessment under the 

Administration’s Global Climate Change Technology Initiative and will provide direction and 

focus on viable large-scale sequestration deployments within the regions. Supporting the 

primary objective will be the refining and implementing of MM&V protocols, developing an 

improved understanding of environmental and safety regulations, establishing protocols for 

project implementation, accounting, and contracts, and conducting public outreach and 

education. Also in Phase II, partnerships will seek to continue the characterization of the 

regions and to refine a national atlas of carbon sources and sinks. 

In FY 2009 DOE will consider an optional Phase III effort for the RCSPs. The third phase, 

which would run through 2013, is contingent upon continued importance/synergies to the 

FutureGen initiative, the need for the validation of additional sequestration sites throughout the 

United States, and budget availability.

One of the cornerstones of our carbon 

sequestration program, a national 

network of regional partnerships, will 

continue its important work in FY 2006. 

This Secretarial initiative has brought 

together the federal government, state 

agencies, universities, and private 

industry to determine which options for 

capturing and storing greenhouse gases 

are most practical for specific areas of 

the country. 

Mark Maddox 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Fossil Energy 

March 16, 2005 
23

Table 8. Phase I Regional Sequestration Partnerships At-A-Glance 

Lead Organization/ 

Webpage Highlights 

California Energy Commission 

http://www.westcarb.org/

• Identified candidate enhanced coal bed m

enhanced oil recovery projects 

• Detailed assessment of forestation as mi

fire management, and biofuel opportunit

New Mexico Institute of Mining and 

Technology 

http://www.southwestcarbonpartnership.org/

• Resource-rich region with two CO2 pipe• Identified seven candidate sites for field • Conducted web-based “town hall” meet

Montana State University 

http://www.bigskyco2.org/

• Large storage potential in basalt formati• Focus on agriculture and forestry projec

increase salability of credits 

• Close interaction with state government

University of North Dakota, Energy 

& Environmental Research Center

http://www.undeerc.org/pcor/

• Region rich in value-added geologic seq• Wetlands a unique regional opportunity • Half-hour sequestration documentary air

Television 

University of Illinois, Illinois State 

Geological Survey 

http://www.sequestration.org/

• Efforts centered on a CO2 pipeline “fairw

region 

• Transportation plans highly developed • Link to agriculture interests through eth

Battelle Memorial Institute

http://198.87.0.58/default.aspx

• Strong analysis and cost-supply curves f• Region accounts for >20% of GHG emi• Interactive website as outreach tool 

Southern States Energy Board

http://www.secarbon.org/

• Electricity supply industry and governor• Carbon offset program, a web-based por

sequestration opportunities 
24

C. Program Management

The DOE is dedicated to achieving the 

Sequestration Program goals and to utilizing the 

Program funds, shown in Figure 9, as effectively 

as possible. This is achieved through cooperative 

and collaborative relationships both domestically 

and internationally, competitive solicitations, 

analysis and project evaluation, project merit 

reviews and proactive public outreach and 

education. These activities support and enhance 

the R&D being conducted in the laboratory and the 

field. Following are management highlights. 

Public/Private Partnerships Public-private 

partnerships and cost-shared R&D are a critical 

part of technology development for carbon 

sequestration. These relationships draw on 

pertinent capabilities that the coal, electricity 

supply, oil and gas, refining, and chemical 

industries have built up over decades and a 

technical knowledge base shared with the national laboratories, federal and state geological surveys, and 

academia. The program engages industry through competitive solicitations, which bring forward the 

companies and researchers with the best ideas and strongest capabilities and also challenges companies 

to offer significant cost-share, leveraging Federal dollars. In 2005, the program will award the second 

phase of the Regional Partnerships through an open competitive solicitation with 20% cost share 

required. Colleges and universities, private research institutes, national laboratories, and other federal 

and state agencies also play a significant role in technology development. Separate competitive 

solicitations are directed towards these institutions to spawn innovative, breakthrough concepts. 

In-House R&D at NETL The Carbon Sequestration Science Focus Area (CSSFA) at NETL conducts 

science-based research and analysis in areas related to carbon sequestration using in-house facilities 

and resources at NETL. The CSSFA has been successful in fostering formal and information 

collaborative relationships with industry and academia in these high-risk research endeavors. The 

CSSFA also provides FE/NETL with a scientific understanding of the underlying technologies and, thus, 

enhances its effectiveness in implementing the carbon sequestration R&D portfolio.

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Many pilot and pre-commercial scale research 

activities are regulated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a procedural regulation that 

requires environmental impact assessments of varying levels of rigor. NETL has conducted a review of 

the requirements under NEPA, and in October, 2003, Rita Bajura, then Director of NETL, issued a 

determination stating that “preparation of a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) 

constitutes the appropriate level of environmental review for implementing the Sequestration Program.” 

In 2004 and 2005, FE/NETL hosted a series of public meetings where Federal Employees explained the 

goals and objectives of the Carbon Sequestration Program and the types of research projects the 

program was conducting and planned to conduct in the future. The PEIS will assess the environmental 

effects of current and potential future initiatives, including field tests, regional partnerships, and core 

R&D. Ultimately, it will help define the scope and direction of future Program activities. Later in 2005, 

FE/NETL will publish a draft Environmental Impact Statement and then conduct a second round of public 

meetings. More information on the FE/NETL PEIS can be found at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/sequestration

Figure 9. DOE Sequestration Program Budget 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Federal Funding (MM$)

request
25

Interagency Coordination In each sequestration area, the DOE program collaborates with other 

agencies with overlapping responsibilities. For example, during 2003 and 2004 the DOE Carbon 

Sequestration Program collaborated with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in an effort to bolster 

R&D efforts in Breakthrough Concepts. A workshop hosted by DOE and NRC identified priorities for 

breakthrough research and a solicitation drawing from the research results produced a pool of over one 

hundred proposals. Seven awards were made in March 2004 and the work is proceeding. 

International Collaboration The 

Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum 

(CSLF) is an international initiative that is 

focused on development of improved 

cost-effective technologies for the 

separation and capture of carbon dioxide 

for its transport and long-term safe 

storage. The purpose of the CSLF is to 

make these technologies broadly 

available internationally; and to identify 

and address wider issues relating to 

carbon capture and storage. This could 

include promoting the appropriate 

technical, political, and regulatory environments for the development of such technology. In 2005 the 

CSLF welcomed France as a member and endorsed ten carbon sequestration projects around the world. 

Information on the CSLF and its activities can be found at http://www.cslforum.org

The Carbon Sequestration Program achieves informal international collaborations that complement the 

CSLF through a variety of mechanisms, including formal bilateral and multilateral agreements, less formal 

cooperation agreements, and coordination of funding by different governments and the private sector. In 

2005 the Sequestration Program provided technical assistance to the Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change including review of a special report on CO2 Capture and Geologic Storage and another 

on Carbon Accounting Protocols. 

Systems, Economic, and Benefits Analyses Systems analyses and economic modeling of potential 

new processes are crucial to providing sound guidance to R&D efforts, which are investigating a wide 

range of CO2 capture options. Many of the technologies being developed by the program are 

investigated at the laboratory or pilot scale. Systems analyses offer the opportunity to visualize how these 

new technologies might fit in a full-scale power plant and identify potential issues with their integration. 

Results of the analyses help make decisions on what technologies the Program should continue funding 

and how the research can be modified to help the technology succeed at full scale. Systems and 

economic analyses are performed by NETL analysts on the full range of technologies being developed 

through the Sequestration Program. Results of these studies are posted on the NETL Sequestration 

Website. 

Systems analysis efforts are aided through the use of modeling tools. To enable the modeling of 

sequestration systems, NETL funds the development of the Integrated Environmental Control Model 

(IECM) which is a publicly-available model that now includes options for CO2 capture and storage. 

http://www.iecm-online.com/

The Program conducts independent studies and participates in cross-cutting studies to model the future 

national energy situation. These activities include Program-specific analyses to look at how sequestration 

might help meet future CO2 emissions reductions goals. They also include broader efforts that use large 

models like DOE’s National Energy Modeling System (NEMs) or ICF’s Integrated Planning Model (IPM) to 

address the benefits and roles of the full suite of advanced fossil energy technologies. The most recent 

programmatic benefits analysis can be downloaded at: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/Carbon%20Sequestration/pubs/analysis/GHGT7%20ID%20506%20Atmospheric%20Stabilization.pdf

Charter CSLF Signing Ceremony, June 2003
26

Education and Outreach The notion of capturing and sequestering carbon dioxide and other 

greenhouse gases is relatively new, and many people are unaware of its role as a greenhouse gas 

reduction strategy. Increased education and awareness are needed to achieve acceptance of carbon 

sequestration by the general public, regulatory agencies, policy makers, and industry and, thus, enable 

future commercial deployments of advanced technology. The following activities highlight the Program’s 

education and outreach efforts: 

♦ Carbon Sequestration Webpage at the NETL site 

♦ Monthly sequestration newsletter 

♦ The Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan, revised annually 

♦ The National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, held annually in the late spring in the 

Washington, DC, area 

♦ Educational curriculum on global climate change and GHG emissions mitigation options 

In addition, the program management team participates in technical conferences through presentations, 

panel discussions, breakout groups, and other formal and informal venues. These efforts expose 

professionals working in other fields to the technology challenges of sequestration and also enable 

examination of some of the more detailed issues underlying the technology. 

In concert with R&D, the Program seeks to engage non-governmental organizations (NGO's) and federal, 

state, and local environmental regulators to raise awareness of the priority the Program places on 

evaluating the potential environmental impacts of sequestration and ensuring that selected technologies 

preserve human and ecosystem health. Many of the Program’s R&D projects have their own outreach 

component. For example, field activities at the Mountaineer Power Plant and the Frio Brine Project have 

resulted in articles that have been run in newspapers across the country. Also, the Regional Partnerships 

will enhance technology development but also engage regulators, policy makers, and interested citizens 

at the state and local level through innovative outreach mechanisms. The Program works directly with 

non-governmental organizations and the environmental community through a variety of activities. 

Successful outreach entails two-way communications, and the Program will consider concerns voiced at 

outreach venues and continually assess the adequacy and focus of the current R&D portfolio. 

Resource Requirements Figure 10 shows the estimated resources needed to pursue the opportunities 

identified in the Program plan and to achieve the Program’s goals. The base Program funding is 

estimated at roughly $55 million per year. The Regional Partnerships require an initial investment but are 

structured to become self-sustaining by 2013. 

Figure 10. Funding Requirements of the Carbon Sequestration Program 

-

50

100

150

200

250

300

2001-2005 2006-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020

5-year period Federal R&D 

Investement, 

millions of dollars

Regional

Sequestration

Partnerships

Base

Sequestration

R&D Program
 

If you have any questions, comments, or would like more information about 

DOE’s Carbon Sequestration Program, please contact the following persons: 

Program-level Personnel: 

National Energy Technology Laboratory 

Strategic Center for Coal 

Office of Fossil Energy 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Office of Coal and Power Systems 

Office of Fossil Energy 

SCOTT KLARA 

(412) 386-4864 

Scott.Klara@netl.doe.gov

SEAN PLASYNSKI 

(412) 386-4867 

Sean.Plasynski@netl.doe.gov

SARAH FORBES 

(304) 285-4670 

Sarah.Forbes@netl.doe.gov

LOWELL MILLER 

(301) 903-9451 

Lowell.Miller@hq.doe.gov

BOB KANE 

(202) 586-4753 

Robert.Kane@hq.doe.gov

JAY BRAITSCH 

(202) 586-9682 

Jay.Braitsch@hq.doe.gov

Technology Experts and Project Managers at the National Energy 

Technology Laboratory:

HEINO BECKERT 

(304) 285-4132 

Heino.Beckert@netl.doe.gov

CHARLIE BYRER 

(304) 285-4547 

Charlie.Byrer@netl.doe.gov

DAWN CHAPMAN 

(304) 285-4133 

Dawn.Chapman@netl.doe.gov

JARED CIFERNO 

(412) 386-5862 

Jared.Ciferno@sa.netl.doe.gov

KAREN COHEN 

(412) 386-6667 

Karen.Cohen@netl.doe.gov

JOSE FIGUEROA 

(412) 386-4966 

Jose.Figueroa@netl.doe.gov

TIMOTHY FOUT 

(304) 285-1341 

Timothy.Fout@netl.doe.gov

DAVID HYMAN 

(412) 386-6572 

David.Hyman@netl.doe.gov

DAVID LANG 

(412) 386-4881 

David.Lang@netl.doe.gov

JOHN LITYNSKI 

(304) 285-1339 

John.Litynski@netl.doe.gov

You can also find information about carbon sequestration at our web sites: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/sequestration

http://www.fe.doe.gov/coal_power/sequestration/