U . S . D e p a r t m e n t o f E n e r g y • O f f i c e o f F o s s i l E n e r g y

N a t i o n a l E n e r g y T e c h n o l o g y L a b o r a t o r y

Carbon Sequestration

Technology

and

Program Plan

2007

Roadmap

Ensuring the Future of Fossil Energy Systems 

through the Successful Deployment of 

Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies

Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 

Table of Contents

I. Message to Stakeholders _______________________________________________4

A. 10-year Milestone for the DOE Carbon Sequestration Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

II. Program Overview____________________________________________________6

A. Program Highlights and Accomplishments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

B. Program Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

C. Program Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

D. Program Funding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

E. Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

III. Challenges__________________________________________________________12

A. Global Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

B. Cost-effective Capture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

C. Geographical Diversity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

D. Permanence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

E. Monitoring, Mitigation, and Verification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

F. Integration and Long-term Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

G. Permitting and Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

H. Public Acceptance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

I. Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

IV. Technology Development Efforts __________________________________________ 16

A. Core R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

 1. CO2 Capture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 2. Carbon Storage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

 3. Monitoring, Mitigation, and Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

 4. Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

 5. Breakthrough Concepts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

B. Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

 1. Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

 2. RCSP Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

 3. Characterization Phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

 4. Validation Phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

 5. Deployment Phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

C. NETL Office of Research and Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

D. Supporting Mechanisms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

 1. International Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

 2. Systems and Benefits Analyses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

 3. Interagency Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

 4. Education and Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

For More Information ___________________________________________________46
	 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

I. Message to 

Stakeholders

Economic growth is closely tied to 

energy availability and consumption, 

particularly lower-cost fossil fuels. 

The use of these fossil fuels results 

in the release of carbon dioxide 

(CO2), which is widely believed to 

contribute to global climate change. 

Balancing the economic value of 

fossil fuels with the environmental 

concerns associated with fossil 

fuel use is a difficult challenge. To 

retain fossil fuels as a viable world 

energy source, carbon capture and 

storage (CCS) technologies must play 

a central role. By cost-effectively 

capturing CO2 before it is emitted to 

the atmosphere and then permanently 

storing or sequestering it, fossil fuels 

can be used in a carbon constrained 

world and without constraining 

economic growth.

The global nature of CO2 emissions 

is illustrated in Figure 1 and shows 

that total world CO2 emissions are 

expected to increase significantly by 

2030. Absent binding constraints, 

CO2 emissions in Organization 

for Economic Cooperation and 

Development (OECD) countries—

which include the United States, most 

of Europe, Australia, Korea, New 

Zealand and Japan—are expected 

to increase at about 1.1 percent per 

year through 2030. CO2 emissions 

in non-OECD countries outside 

Europe and Eurasia—including 

fossil fuel-rich China and India—are 

expected to grow at 3.0 percent per 

year, in line with strong economic 

growth. As a point of reference, the 

U.S. emitted about 6 billion metric 

tons of CO2 in 2005, accounting for 

about 22 percent of total world CO2

emissions.

On a global scale, CCS technologies 

have the potential to reduce overall 

climate change mitigation costs 

and increase flexibility in reducing 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 

According to the 2005 report, 

Carbon Dioxide Capture and 

Storage, by the Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 

the application of CCS technologies 

in GHG mitigation portfolios could 

reduce the costs of stabilizing CO2

concentrations in the atmosphere 

by 30 percent or more compared to 

scenarios where CCS technologies 

are not deployed. Furthermore, 

a particularly beneficial aspect of 

certain CCS technologies is that 

their component parts – carbon 

capture, transportation, and storage 

– can utilize technologies adapted 

from other commercial industries, 

enhancing the availability and cost 

competitiveness of CCS technologies 

as viable mitigation options.

The Global Energy Technology 

Strategy Program (GTSP) – a 

public and private sector research 

collaboration comprised of scientists 

from Battelle, the U.S. Department 

of Energy (DOE), Pacific Northwest 

National Laboratory (PNNL), and 

the Joint Global Change Research 

Institute (a partnership between 

PNNL and the University of 

Maryland) – has identified nearterm, medium-term, and long-term 

benefits associated with CCS. In the 

near term, CCS technologies will 

allow many industries – including 

electricity generation, refining, 

chemical production, and steel 

and cement manufacturing – to 

chart a viable path forward into a 

carbon-constrained world. In the 

medium term, CCS technologies 

will facilitate a smoother transition 

of the global economy to a low 

GHG emissions future. In the long 

term, CCS will make valuable 

commodities like electricity and 

hydrogen cheaper than they would 

be if such technologies were not 

available.

DOE is taking a leadership 

role in the development of CCS 

technologies. Through its Carbon 

Sequestration Program (Program) 

– managed within the Office of 

Fossil Energy (FE) and implemented 

by the National Energy Technology 

Laboratory (NETL) – DOE is 

Figure 1. World CO2 Emissions by Region

I. Message to Stakeholders
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 

developing both core and supporting 

technologies through which CCS 

will become an effective and 

economically viable option for 

reducing CO2 emissions. The 

Program works in concert with 

other programs within FE that are 

developing technologies integral 

to coal-fueled power generation 

with carbon capture: advanced 

integrated gasification combined 

cycle (IGCC), advanced turbines, 

fuel cells, and advanced research. 

Successful research and development 

(R&D) will enable carbon control 

technologies to overcome the 

various technical, economic, and 

social challenges, including costeffective CO2

 capture, long-term 

stability (permanence) of CO2 in 

underground formations, monitoring 

and verification, integration with 

power generation systems, and public 

acceptance. 

The overall goal of the Carbon 

Sequestration Program is to develop, 

by 2012, fossil fuel conversion 

systems that achieve 90 percent 

CO2 capture with 99 percent storage 

permanence at less than a 10 percent 

increase in the cost of energy 

services. Reaching this goal requires 

an integrated research, development, 

and deployment program linking 

fundamental advances in CCS to 

practical advances in technologies 

amenable to extended commercial 

use. The technologies developed 

in this Program will also serve as 

test components in the FutureGen 

Initiative, aimed at building the first 

power plant in the world to integrate 

permanent carbon storage with coalto-energy conversion and hydrogen 

production.

A. 10-year Milestone

for the DOE Carbon

Sequestration Program

The year 2007 marks the 10-year 

anniversary of the DOE’s Carbon 

Sequestration Program. Launched in 

1997 as a small-scale research effort 

to ascertain the technical viability of 

CCS, the Program has grown into a 

multi-faceted research, development, 

and deployment initiative that aims 

to provide the means by which 

fossil fuels can continue to be used 

for power generation in a carbonconstrained world. The first 10 years 

have significantly advanced the 

knowledge base pertaining to CO2

separation, geologic and terrestrial 

storage, regulations and permitting, 

and process economics. Much 

work remains, however, to enable 

the large-scale deployment of 

CCS technologies. In particular, 

extended field tests are required to 

fully characterize potential storage 

sites and demonstrate the long-term 

storage of sequestered carbon to 

achieve cost-effective integration 

with power plant systems. Looking 

forward, it is also important to 

recognize CCS as more than just 

an end-of-process emissions control 

technology. CCS technologies 

represent critical elements in 

the entire energy supply picture, 

providing CO2 capture and storage 

solutions that will enable sustained 

fossil fuel conversion and offer a 

resource recovery pathway that 

will facilitate greater recovery 

of domestic oil, natural gas, and 

coalbed methane.

This document describes the 

Technology Roadmap and 

Program Plan that will guide the 

Carbon Sequestration Program in 

2007 and beyond. An overview 

of the Program and the key 

accomplishments in its 10-year 

history are presented as well as the 

challenges confronting deployment 

and successful commercialization of 

carbon sequestration technologies. 

The research pathways that will be 

used to achieve Program goals and 

information on key contacts and 

web links related to the Program are 

included. 

This document is intended to be a 

valuable tool in engaging interested 

stakeholders. We invite readers to 

contact any of the persons listed on 

the inside back cover with comments, 

concerns, or suggestions.

I. Message to Stakeholders
	 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

II. Program 

Overview

The DOE’s Carbon Sequestration 

Program leverages applied research 

with field demonstrations to assess 

the technical and economic viability 

of carbon capture and storage as a 

GHG mitigation option.

A. Program Highlights

and Accomplishments

Since its inception 10 years ago, 

the Program has been moving CCS 

technology forward to enable its 

cost-effective use in meeting any 

future GHG emissions reduction 

requirements. The first decade has 

significantly advanced the knowledge 

base pertaining to CO2 separation, 

geologic and terrestrial sequestration, 

regulations and permitting, and 

process economics. 

The Program is a true government 

success story. What began as an idea 

has resulted in international support 

of CCS as a leading mitigation 

option for reducing GHG emissions 

to the atmosphere. Major Program 

accomplishments over its 10-year life 

include:

• Carbon Sequestration Atlas. The 

Carbon Sequestration Atlas of 

the United States and Canada

– developed by NETL, the 

Regional Carbon Sequestration 

Partnerships (RCSPs), and the 

National Carbon Sequestration 

Database and Geographical 

Information System (NATCARB) 

– contains information on 

stationary sources for CO2

emissions, geologic formations 

with sequestration potential, 

and terrestrial ecosystems 

with potential for enhanced 

carbon uptake, all referenced 

to their geographic location to 

enable matching sources and 

sequestration sites. An interactive 

version of the Atlas is available 

through the NATCARB website 

(www.natcarb.org). The Atlas can 

be downloaded at http://www.netl.

doe.gov/publications/carbon_seq/

atlas/index.html.

• CO2 Capture. The Program has 

conducted research into solvent, 

sorbent, membrane, and oxycombustion systems that, upon 

successful development, will be 

capable of capturing greater than 

90 percent of the flue gas CO2

at a significant cost reduction 

when compared to state-ofthe-art, amine-based capture 

systems. Through research and 

systems analysis over the past 

years, potential cost reductions 

of 30-45 percent have been 

identified for the capture of 

CO2. In addition, ionic liquid 

membranes and absorbents are 

being developed for capture of 

CO2 from power plants. Ionic 

liquid membranes have been 

developed at NETL for precombustion applications that 

surpass polymers in terms of CO2

selectivity and permeability at 

elevated temperatures. In related 

DOE-funded academic research, 

significant progress has been 

made in developing ionic liquid 

absorbents for post-combustion 

applications that show increasing 

breakthrough potential for more 

cost effective capture of CO2 from 

flue gas.

• CO2 Storage. Program efforts 

in geologic and terrestrial CO2

storage have led to a better 

understanding of sequestration 

potential and the ability to 

characterize capillary forces 

that immobilize CO2 in the pore 

spaces of a formation – also 

known as residual CO2 trapping – 

in CO2 fate and transport models. 

Furthermore, the Program has 

been a leader in efforts to enhance 

terrestrial ecosystems as carbon 

sequestration sites and to calibrate 

models for quantifying the 

amount of carbon stored.

• Monitoring, Mitigation, and 

Verification (MM&V). Field 

projects have demonstrated the 

ability to “map” CO2 injected 

into an underground formation 

at a much higher resolution 

than previously anticipated 

and confirmed the ability of 

perfluorocarbon tracers to 

track CO2 movement through 

a reservoir. DOE-sponsored 

research has also led to the 

development of the U-Tube 

sampler, which was developed for 

and successfully deployed at the 

Frio test site in Texas. This novel 

tool is used to obtain geochemical 

samples of both the water and gas 

portions of downhole samples 

at in situ pressure. The data 

collected from this tool has led 

to a better understanding of 

the coupled hydrogeochemical 

conditions affecting CO2 storage 

in brine filled formations.

• Systems Analysis. NETL’s 

Office of Systems, Analysis, and 

Planning (OSAP) has conducted 

innovative assessments of CO2

capture and separations processes. 

The OSAP work in this area has 

increased understanding of the 

II. Program Overview
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	

issues surrounding integration of 

CO2 capture systems with different 

fuel conversion systems, leading to 

the identification of improvement 

opportunities with the potential 

to significantly reduce costs. 

Two recently completed systems 

analyses are documented in the 

following reports: CO2 Capture 

from Existing Coal-Fired Power 

Plants and Cost and Performance 

Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants. 

(Reports at: http://www.netl.doe.

gov/technologies/carbon_seq/

Resources/Analysis/)

B. Program Structure

The Carbon Sequestration Program 

encompasses two main elements: 

Core R&D and Demonstration and 

Deployment. Figure 2 shows how 

these elements are linked. The Core 

R&D element converts technology 

needs in several focus areas into 

technology solutions that can then 

be demonstrated and deployed in the 

field. Lessons learned from the field 

tests are fed back to the Core R&D 

element to guide future research and 

development.

Core R&D involves laboratory 

and pilot-scale research aimed at 

developing new technologies and 

new systems for GHG mitigation. 

The Core R&D portfolio includes 

cost-shared, industry-led technology 

development projects, research 

grants, and research conducted 

through NETL’s Office of Research 

and Development (ORD). The 

Core R&D effort encompasses five 

focus areas: CO2 capture; carbon 

storage; monitoring, mitigation, and 

verification; non-CO2 greenhouse gas 

control; and breakthrough concepts. 

The first three Core R&D research 

areas track the life cycle of a CCS 

system: CO2 is first captured, 

then it is stored (sequestered) or 

converted to a benign or useful 

carbon-based product, and finally 

it is monitored to ensure that it 

remains stored, with appropriate 

mitigation actions taken as needed. 

The fourth category, non-CO2

greenhouse gas control, primarily 

involves the capture and reuse of 

methane emissions from energy 

production and conversion systems 

such as the capture and use of coal 

mine ventilation air methane. The 

fifth area, breakthrough concepts, 

targets novel concepts with a high 

degree of technical uncertainty and 

those with the potential to expand 

the applicability of CCS beyond 

conventional stationary source 

emissions. Promising breakthrough 

II. Program Overview

Figure 2. U.S. DOE Carbon Sequestration Technology Development
	 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Figure 3. Energy Recovery and Conversion Relationships

concepts being pursued include 

ionic liquids and microporous metal 

organic frameworks (MOFs) for 

capturing CO2.

The Demonstration and Deployment 

element of the Carbon Sequestration 

Program is designed to demonstrate 

the viability of CCS technologies 

at a scale large enough to overcome 

real and perceived infrastructure 

challenges. Technologies will be 

tested in the field to identify and 

eliminate technical and economic 

barriers to commercialization. Such 

an effort is necessary to ensure that 

organizations are prepared to act if 

future global climate change policies 

require large-scale deployment of 

sequestration technology.

The largest component of the 

Demonstration and Deployment 

element is the Regional Carbon 

Sequestration Partnerships Program. 

The seven RCSPs are examining 

regional differences in geology, land 

practices, ecosystem management, 

and industrial activity that can affect 

the deployment of CCS technologies. 

The Carbon Sequestration Program 

also supports FutureGen, a key 

DOE initiative aimed at building a 

highly efficient and technologically 

sophisticated power plant that 

can produce both hydrogen and 

electricity while capturing and 

sequestering CO2 emissions. 

FutureGen will serve as a fullscale field laboratory for CCS 

technologies, providing a venue for 

evaluating technologies emerging 

from Core R&D efforts.

The Carbon Sequestration Program 

consists of supporting mechanisms 

performing systems analyses and 

economic modeling of potential new 

CO2 capture processes to identify 

issues with their integration into 

full-scale power plants. The Program 

also participates in cross-cutting 

studies to model future national 

energy scenarios incorporating 

carbon sequestration. Finally, the 

Program collaborates with other U.S. 

government agencies with overlapping 

responsibilities and works with the 

international community through its 

membership in organizations such as 

the Carbon Sequestration Leadership 

Forum (CSLF).

C. Program Role

Figure 3 illustrates the unique role 

that CCS could play in future energy 

supply networks. The long-term 

viability of various fuel conversion 

pathways – including pulverized 

coal (PC) combustion, integrated 

gasification combined-cycle, biomass 

gasification, and coal-to-liquids 

– may hinge on the availability of 

cost-effective CCS technologies. 

However, carbon capture and 

subsurface injection represents 

more than just an end-of-process 

emissions control technology. These 

technologies could provide additional 

value by facilitating the recovery 

of several subsurface resources, 

including oil, natural gas, and 

coalbed methane. 

Currently, in the absence of 

regulations limiting or taxing 

carbon emissions, the private sector 

has little incentive to develop 

and deploy commercial CCS 

technologies. However, through 

cost-shared R&D, the Federal 

government has a role to play in 

ensuring the availability of costeffective technologies for capturing 

and sequestering CO2 from fossil 

fuel use. Commercial availability 

of CCS technology provides public 

benefits in the form of the continued 

use of cost-effective fossil fuels in an 

environmentally friendly manner.

II. Program Overview
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 

As a technology and a research 

discipline, carbon sequestration is 

in its infancy. To guide the Carbon 

Sequestration Program through this 

early development period, DOE 

established the following initial 

technology goal: “To develop, by 

2012, fossil fuel conversion systems 

that offer 90 percent CO2 capture 

with 99 percent storage permanence 

at less than a 10 percent increase in 

the cost of energy services.”

By simultaneously exploring a number 

of related research pathways, the 

many challenges confronting carbon 

sequestration can be overcome, 

enabling the Program to achieve this 

ambitious goal. R&D progress along 

each of the research pathways shown 

in Figure 4 will be necessary.

• 90 percent CO2 capture: The 

amount of CO2 captured 

represents 90 percent of the 

carbon in the fuel fed to the 

power plant or other energy 

system. Higher levels of capture 

are possible but at significantly 

higher cost as driving forces for 

separation decrease. A 90 percent 

capture level may be necessary to 

significantly reduce emissions. 

• 99 percent storage permanence: 

After 100 years, less than one 

percent of the injected CO2 has 

leaked or is otherwise unaccounted 

for. Implied in this performance 

measure are advanced monitoring, 

mitigation, and verification 

(MM&V) technologies and 

modeling capabilities that make 

it possible to achieve and prove 

99 percent storage permanence. 

The goal is an average for all 

deployments. The test for success is 

whether projects can garner credits 

for 99 percent of injected CO2.

• 10 percent increase in the 

cost of energy services: It is 

believed that a 10 percent cost of 

electricity (COE) increase would 

significantly reduce impact to the 

economy. This level will also 

enable fossil fuel systems with 

CO2 capture and sequestration 

to compete with other power 

generation options to reduce the 

GHG intensity of energy supply, 

including wind, biomass, and 

nuclear power. For the electricity 

supply sector, the 10 percent 

COE increase target is based 

on plant gate cost from a newly 

constructed power plant with 

capital recovery. The baseline for 

determining the 10 percent COE 

increase is the competitive cost 

of power generation at the time 

of deployment of a sequestration 

plant. For calculation purposes, 

the baseline cost is derived from 

the DOE Energy Information 

Administration (EIA) Annual 

Figure 4. Carbon Sequestration Program Goal and Research Pathways

II. Program Overview
10 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Energy Outlook projection for 

the average generation cost of 

electricity from the utility sector. 

The cost of CO2 capture and 

storage includes parasitic power 

requirements, CO2 compression, 

pipeline transport of 50 miles, and 

injection into a saline formation. 

Revenues from CO2 sales for 

enhanced oil recovery (EOR), 

enhanced gas recovery (EGR), 

and enhanced coalbed methane 

(ECBM) recovery are not credited 

against the cost of CO2 capture. 

Net reductions in the cost of 

criteria pollutant control are 

included.

• By 2012: The Program seeks to 

have pilot-scale unit operation 

performance results from a 

combination of CO2 capture, 

MM&V, and storage system 

components such that, when 

integrated into a systems analysis 

framework, would collectively 

meet the above goals. Accounting 

for the lag associated with prelarge-scale validation and design 

and construction of large-scale 

systems, projects that meet the 

Program goal will result in largescale units that come on-line 

around 2020.

For an evolving technology Program 

such as carbon sequestration, this 

initial Program goal represents a 

near-term opportunity to gauge 

Program progress and success. 

Longer-term goals are important to 

further explore the capabilities and 

potential of carbon sequestration. 

Figure 5 summarizes important 

accomplishments in the Program 

history and also lists future Program 

milestones. Additional milestones 

will be added as lessons learned 

from the Demonstration and 

Deployment element are fed back 

to the Core R&D element to guide 

future efforts. 

II. Program Overview
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 11 Figure 5. Carbon Sequestration Program Milestones and Goals

II. Program Overview
12 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

D. Program Funding

Translating the research, 

development, and deployment 

activities for the Carbon 

Sequestration Program into 

public benefits will continue to 

require effective use of Program 

funds (Figure 6). This is being 

achieved through cooperative and 

collaborative relationships, both 

domestically and internationally: 

competitive solicitations; analysis 

and project evaluation; project merit 

reviews; proactive public outreach 

and education; and an emphasis on 

cost-sharing. Currently, the Program 

funds more than 70 projects in a 

diverse portfolio with strong industry 

support that is evident by the average 

31 percent cost share of projects.

E. Carbon Sequestration

Leadership Forum

The Carbon Sequestration 

Leadership Forum is a voluntary 

climate initiative of developed and 

developing nations that accounts for 

about 75 percent of all manmade 

CO2 emissions. The CSLF was 

established in 2003 and focuses on 

development of CCS technologies 

as a means of accomplishing longterm stabilization of GHG levels 

in the atmosphere. Its goal is to 

improve carbon capture and storage 

technologies through coordinated 

research and development with 

international partners and private 

industry. This could include 

promoting the appropriate technical, 

and regulatory environments for the 

development of such technology. 

The CSLF is currently comprised of 

22 members, including 21 countries 

and the European Commission. 

Members engage in coordinated and 

cooperative technology development 

aimed at enabling the early and 

on-going reduction of CO2 which 

constitutes more than 60 percent 

of such emissions – the product 

of electricity generation and other 

heavy industrial activity. 

III. Challenges

Carbon capture and storage 

technology encompasses two main 

CO2 reduction pathways, both of 

which have a role in mitigating 

potential climate change. The CO2 

can either be captured at the point 

where it is produced (stationary 

source) or it can be removed from 

the air. In geologic sequestration 

focused on capture from stationary 

sources, the captured CO2 is 

permanently stored underground. In 

terrestrial sequestration focused on 

removing CO2 from the air, the CO2

is absorbed by plants or soils. 

The Carbon Sequestration Program

is designed to explore these pathways 

and develop the technology base 

and infrastructure that will enable 

carbon sequestration to become a 

prominent GHG mitigation option. 

Common to any such technology 

roadmapping effort is the recognition 

and identification of challenges that 

currently hinder commercialization. 

Various technical, economic, 

and social challenges currently 

prevent carbon capture and 

storage from being a widely used 

commercial technology. The 

Carbon Sequestration Program is 

addressing these challenges through 

applied research, proof-of-concept 

technology evaluation, pilot-scale 

testing, large-scale deployment, 

stakeholder involvement, and public 

outreach. 

A. Global Climate Change

Over the past century, GHG 

emissions have increased 

significantly. In 1900, worldwide 

CO2 emissions amounted to less 

than 2 billion metric tons per year, 

according to the Carbon Dioxide Figure 6. DOE Sequestration Program Budget

III. Challenges
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 13

Information Analysis Center. In 

2004, worldwide CO2 emissions 

totaled more than 27 billion metric 

tons, according to the EIA. The 

concern is that atmospheric GHG 

accumulations in excess of levels 

required to sustain the greenhouse 

effect introduce an external forcing 

factor leading to global temperature 

increases.

Reducing potential global climate 

change through atmospheric 

reductions in GHG concentrations 

represents a complex, largescale effort. Carbon dioxide, for 

example, is emitted from many 

different sectors: transportation, 

residential, commercial, industrial, 

and electricity generation. Carbon 

capture and storage is not equally 

applicable or economically viable 

across these sectors and would likely 

represent just one element of a multifaceted approach that would include 

energy efficiency improvements, 

greater use of renewable energy 

and nuclear power, migration to 

less carbon-intensive fuels, and 

enhancement of various types of 

sequestration for carbon emissions. 

Because the power generation sector 

emits the largest fraction of CO2 in 

most industrial countries, however, 

and because power plants represent 

a large, concentrated stationary 

source of CO2 emissions, carbon 

capture and storage from stationary 

power plants would likely be a core 

component of any effort aimed at 

significantly reducing atmospheric 

CO2 concentrations. 

B. Cost-effective Capture

For geologic sequestration 

applications in which the CO2

is stored underground, there are 

three main cost components: 

capture, transport, and storage 

(which encompasses injection and 

monitoring). The cost of capture 

is typically several times greater 

than the cost of both transport and 

storage. In today’s economic and 

regulatory environment, carbon 

capture technologies could increase 

electricity production costs by 

60-100 percent at existing power 

plants and by 25-50 percent at new 

advanced coal-fired power plants 

using IGCC technology.

While industrial CO2 separation 

processes are commercially 

available, they have not been 

deployed at the scale required for 

large power plant applications 

and, consequently, their use could 

significantly increase electricity 

production costs. Improvements 

to existing CO2 capture processes, 

therefore, as well as the development 

of alternative capture technologies, 

are important in reducing the costs 

incurred for carbon capture. 

C. Geographical Diversity

Carbon capture and storage efforts 

will be inherently regional in nature. 

Geographical differences in the 

number, type, size, and concentration 

of stationary GHG sources, coupled 

with geographical differences in 

the number, type, and potential 

capacity of sequestration sites, 

dictate a regional approach to carbon 

management. For example, Texas, 

Oklahoma, and other oil and gas 

producing states may focus carbon 

management practices on capturing 

CO2 and injecting it into producing 

oil and gas fields to enhance 

recovery. Conversely, states in the 

Great Plains and Upper Midwest may 

supplement geologic sequestration 

projects at remote power plants with 

terrestrial sequestration projects 

that enhance carbon storage using 

agricultural and forest management 

practices.

To address the importance of 

geographical diversity in addressing 

carbon management issues, DOE is 

funding seven RCSPs that coordinate 

research, development, deployment, 

and outreach in a particular region 

of the country. These RCSPs will 

define and implement the technology, 

infrastructure, standards, and 

regulations necessary to promote 

CO2 sequestration in their respective 

Regions.

D. Permanence

One challenge facing carbon capture 

and storage is the long-term fate or 

“permanence” of the stored CO2. 

To ensure that carbon sequestration 

represents an effective pathway 

for CO2 management, permanence 

must be confirmed at a high level 

of accuracy. The concept of 

permanence is applicable to both 

terrestrial and geologic sequestration. 

For terrestrial sequestration, 

permanence refers to the fate of 

CO2 absorbed by plants and stored 

in soils. For geologic sequestration, 

permanence refers to the retention 

of CO2 in underground geologic 

formations. 

Scientific analysis supports the 

long-term storage value attributed 

to carbon sequestration. As stated 

in the 2005 IPCC special report, 

Carbon Dioxide Capture and 

Storage, observations and analysis 

of current CO2 storage sites, natural 

systems, engineering systems, and 

models indicate that the amount 

of CO2 retained in appropriately 

selected and managed reservoirs 

is very likely (probability of 

III. Challenges
14 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

90-99 percent) to exceed 99 percent 

over 100 years and is likely 

(probability of 66-90 percent) to 

exceed 99 percent over 1,000 years. 

Moreover, the potential for leakage 

is expected to decrease over time as 

other mechanisms provide additional 

trapping.

E. Monitoring, Mitigation,

and Verification

Closely related to permanence is the 

issue of monitoring, mitigation, and 

verification. The ultimate success of 

carbon capture and storage projects 

will hinge on the ability to measure 

the amount of CO2 stored at a 

particular site, the ability to confirm 

that the stored CO2 is not harming 

the host ecosystem, and the ability 

to effectively mitigate any impacts 

associated with a CO2 leakage. 

As with permanence, MM&V is 

applicable to both terrestrial and 

geologic sequestration. Terrestrial 

MM&V must overcome difficulties 

in assessing carbon storage in 

large ecosystems (such as forests) 

and in gauging carbon storage 

potential in various types of soils. 

Geologic MM&V must contend with 

challenges spanning the movement 

of CO2 in geologic reservoirs, 

the effect of various physical and 

chemical forces on the CO2 plume, 

leak detection, and the development 

of robust mitigation techniques that 

can respond to a variety of potential 

leakage events.

F. Integration and Longterm Performance

A number of the technological 

elements associated with carbon 

capture and storage are proven, but 

there has been no demonstrated 

long-term performance at large 

industrial sites integrating carbon 

capture, transportation, and final 

storage. Much of the knowledge 

base pertaining to carbon capture 

and storage has been derived from 

the oil and natural gas industries, 

where CO2 has been injected for 

over 30 years for oil recovery and 

the incremental storage cost is small. 

Broader implementation is required, 

particularly in the power generation 

industry, but such commercialization 

is not likely absent emission 

regulations, incentives, or 

government funding.

Long-term integrated testing and 

validation is necessary for technical, 

economic, and regulatory reasons. 

From a technical perspective, the 

ability to separate a CO2 stream 

from the power plant flue gas stream, 

compress it for pipeline delivery, and 

sustain delivery at pressures adequate 

to ensure dependable injectivity 

and reservoir permeability must 

be confirmed. From an economic 

perspective, the costs associated with 

CCS must be quantified in greater 

detail to encourage investment 

and ensure cost recovery. From a 

regulatory perspective, long-term 

operating data must be collected 

to ensure that CO2 transportation 

systems, injection wells, and storage 

reservoirs are properly regulated 

to safeguard the environment and 

public health. 

G. Permitting and Liability

Because carbon capture and 

storage remains a relatively young 

technology – particularly in terms 

of projects in the field – a number 

of permitting and liability issues 

are still evolving. With respect 

to permitting, CO2 injection and 

monitoring wells will have to 

comply with state and Federal 

regulations. In early 2006, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) concluded that geologic 

sequestration of CO2 through well 

injection met the definition of 

“underground injection” in the Safe 

Drinking Water Act. As a result, 

underground sources of drinking 

water must be protected from 

potential endangerment attributed to 

carbon sequestration pilot projects, 

most likely through the issuance 

of underground injection control 

permits. Currently, injection wells 

for carbon sequestration with EOR 

or EGR are being permitted as 

Class II injection wells (wells that 

inject waste fluids associated with 

the production of oil and natural 

gas). However, injection wells 

for all other carbon sequestration 

projects are being permitted as 

Class V experimental technology 

wells (wells that are not included 

in any other class and inject nonhazardous fluids). To ensure that 

Agency efforts are coordinated 

and communicated effectively, 

DOE participates in quarterly 

meetings at a high management 

level with EPA. In addition, both 

DOE and the RCSPs were involved 

with providing comments for 

EPA’s first Underground Injection 

Control program guidance related 

to permitting initial pilot projects 

as experimental technology wells, 

giving regulatory agencies enhanced 

flexibility in expediting these projects.

Access and liability issues represent 

another uncertain, evolving 

challenge. In many states, land 

rights are held separate from mineral 

rights, potentially complicating 

sequestration projects aimed at 

secondary resource recovery. 

Gaining access to attractive 

underground storage sites may prove 

to be difficult in some cases. 

III. Challenges
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 15

Liability concerns primarily center 

on which entity or group of entities 

will be responsible for the CO2

stored underground after injection 

is completed. Since the stored CO2

will conceivably remain underground 

indefinitely, lines of responsibility 

must be defined that can track 

potential damage or impacts to a 

particular leak. Federal and state 

agencies, insurance companies, the 

CO2 producer, the sequestration site 

operator, and the landowner may all 

be involved in determining the chain 

of custody, developing appropriate 

bonding mechanisms, remediating 

any problems, and providing longterm monitoring. Illinois and 

Texas have recently addressed 

these liability issues as they relate 

to clean coal projects. Legislation 

pending in Illinois would provide 

adequate liability protection and 

permitting certainty to facilitate the 

siting of a FutureGen project in the 

state. While the FutureGen plant 

operator would retain title to and any 

liabilities associated with the preinjection CO2

, the state would accept 

title to and any liabilities associated 

with the sequestered gas. Legislation 

enacted in Texas specifies that the 

owner or operator of a clean coal 

project will retain liability for the 

CO2 generated before it is captured 

but indicates that the state will 

accept title to the CO2 captured by 

the power plant and may make it 

available for sale or for injection into 

a geologic formation for permanent 

storage.

H. Public Acceptance

The public is generally unfamiliar 

with CCS and the large role it 

might play in the reduction of 

GHG emissions. Education and 

outreach efforts are required to 

dispel misconceptions, outline 

opportunities and challenges, 

and invite feedback pertaining to 

implementation mechanisms. 

Public support is critical to 

the success of research and 

commercialization efforts; more 

importantly, public disapproval 

is very difficult to overcome. It 

is imperative, therefore, that the 

relevant government and private 

entities engage the public to 

explain the technology and address 

environmental, health, and safety 

concerns as they arise. Public 

outreach activities conducted by the 

RCSP coordinators have included: 

development and utilization of a 

suite of educational and outreach 

tools to communicate with national, 

regional, and local audiences, 

policymakers, and stakeholders on 

the subject of carbon sequestration 

including a carbon sequestration 

video for general and non-technical 

audiences; focus groups to gauge 

public knowledge and perceptions 

of carbon sequestration; town 

hall-style meetings to inform and 

educate about sequestration; risk 

communication workshops; and 

hundreds of carbon sequestration 

posters, presentations, and other 

outreach materials for public 

dissemination.

I. Infrastructure

If carbon capture and storage 

is widely deployed to control 

CO2 emissions, significant 

infrastructure investments will be 

required, particularly for geologic 

sequestration. Stationary source 

CO2 emitters like coal-fired power 

plants may have to invest in a host 

of non-core assets, including carbon 

separation systems, CO2 pipelines, 

drilling rigs, injection systems, and 

monitoring networks. Beyond the 

capital investment required, emitters 

may face resource competition for 

the equipment and personnel needed 

to install, operate, and maintain 

these systems. Access to drilling 

rigs, for example, could become a 

key issue if the oil and natural gas 

sectors continue aggressive domestic 

drilling campaigns.

During the large-scale carbon 

sequestration test projects planned 

for the next 10 years, an additional 

infrastructure challenge involves 

the supply of sufficient CO2 to 

enable long-term deployment and 

evaluation. While huge quantities of 

CO2 are theoretically available from 

power plant sources, separation and 

supply of this CO2 for the carbon 

storage deployments projects is 

unlikely because of the expense 

involved in separating the CO2

in the absence of CO2 emission 

regulations and/or because of the 

uncertain reliability associated with 

utility-scale CO2 separation systems. 

In most cases, the CO2 required 

for the deployment projects will 

be supplied from natural sources 

or from industrial processes that 

produce a relatively pure CO2 stream 

as a by-product. Securing sufficient 

quantities of CO2 from these sources 

is a key requirement. 

III. Challenges
16 Carbon Sequestration Technology 15Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

IV. 

Technology 

Development 

Efforts

The Carbon Sequestration Program 

is developing a portfolio of 

technologies with great potential to 

reduce GHG emissions. The primary 

concentration of this high priority 

Program is on dramatically lowering 

the cost and energy requirements 

of pre- and post-combustion CO2

capture. The goal is to have a 

technology portfolio by 2012 for 

safe, cost-effective, and long-term 

carbon mitigation, management, 

and storage, which will lead to 

substantial market penetration after 

2012. In the long-term, the Program 

is expected to contribute significantly 

to the President’s goal of developing 

technologies to substantially reduce 

GHG emissions.

A. Core R&D

The Program’s Core R&D element 

encompasses five focus areas: 

CO2 Capture; Carbon Storage; 

Monitoring, Mitigation, and 

Verification; Non-CO2 Greenhouse 

Gas Control; and Breakthrough 

Concepts. Research activities 

are conducted through an array 

of internal and external funding 

mechanisms, spanning laboratoryscale research through pilot-scale 

deployment. Focus area research 

converts technology needs related 

to CCS into technology solutions 

ready for larger-scale testing and 

deployment.

1. CO2 Capture

Carbon sequestration begins with 

the separation and capture of CO2

from power plant flue gas and other 

stationary sources. At present, this 

process is both costly and energy 

intensive; analysis shows that CO2

capture accounts for the majority 

of the cost of the CCS system. 

Therefore, R&D goals within the 

Program’s CO2 Capture focus area 

are aimed at improving the efficiency 

and reducing the costs of capturing 

CO2 emissions from coal-fired 

power generating plants, as shown in 

Figure 7. 

The Program currently funds a large 

number of laboratory-scale and pilotscale research projects involving 

solvents, sorbents, membranes, and 

oxygen combustion systems (oxycombustion). Efforts are focused 

on systems for capturing CO2 from 

coal-fired power plants since they are 

the largest stationary sources of CO2, 

although the technologies developed 

will be applicable to natural-gasfired power plants and industrial CO2

sources as well.

Figure 8 highlights the critical 

challenges and R&D pathways 

related to CO2 capture. The 

pathways include both advanced 

fossil fuel conversion technologies 

and CO2 capture technologies, 

recognizing the strong synergy 

that exists between the two areas. 

The Program’s CO2 capture 

research is being conducted in 

close coordination with research on 

advanced, higher-efficiency power 

generation and fossil fuel conversion.

CO2 capture systems may be 

divided into three categories: postcombustion, pre-combustion, and 

oxy-combustion. 

Post-combustion. Post-combustion 

CO2 capture is primarily applicable 

to conventional coal-fired power 

generation, but may also be applied 

to gas-fired generation using 

combustion turbines. In a typical 

coal-fired power generation system, 

fuel is burned with air in a boiler 

to produce steam; the steam drives 

a turbine to generate electricity, 

as shown in Figure 9. The boiler 

exhaust, or flue gas, consists mostly 

of nitrogen (N2) and CO2. Separating 

CO2 from this flue gas stream is 

challenging for several reasons: 

• CO2 is present at dilute 

concentrations (13-15 volume 

percent in coal-fired systems and 

3-4 volume percent in gas-fired 

turbines) and at low pressure 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 7. Capture Goals
Carbon Sequestration Technology 16Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 17

(15-25 pounds per square inch 

absolute [psia]), which dictates that 

a high volume of gas be treated.

• Trace impurities (particulate 

matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen 

oxides) in the flue gas can 

degrade sorbents and reduce 

the effectiveness of certain CO2

capture processes.

• Compressing captured or 

separated CO2 from atmospheric 

pressure to pipeline pressure 

(about 2,000 psia) represents a 

large auxiliary power load on the 

overall power plant system.

Absorption processes based on 

chemical solvents such as amines, 

as described in Figure 9, have 

been developed and deployed 

commercially in certain industries. 

To date, however, their use in PC 

power plants has been restricted 

to slipstream applications, and 

no definitive analysis exists as to 

the actual costs for a full-scale 

capture plant. Preliminary analysis 

conducted at NETL indicates that 

CO2 capture via amine scrubbing 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 8. CO2 Capture Pathways
18 Carbon Sequestration Technology 17Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

and compression to 2,200 psia could 

raise the cost of electricity from a 

new supercritical PC power plant by 

65 percent, from 5.0 cents/kilowatthour (kWh) to 8.25 cents/kWh. 

Pre-combustion. Pre-combustion 

CO2 capture relates to gasification 

plants, where fuel is converted 

into gaseous components by 

applying heat under pressure in the 

presence of steam (Figure 10). In a 

gasification reactor, the amount of 

air or oxygen (O2) available inside 

the gasifier is carefully controlled so 

that only a portion of the fuel burns 

completely. This “partial oxidation” 

process provides the heat necessary 

to chemically decompose the fuel 

and produce synthesis gas (syngas), 

which is composed of hydrogen 

(H2), carbon monoxide (CO) and 

minor amounts of other gaseous 

constituents. The syngas is then 

processed in a water-gas-shift (WGS) 

reactor, which converts the CO to 

CO2 and increases the CO2 and H2

mole concentrations to 40 percent 

and 55 percent, respectively, in the 

syngas stream. 

At this point, the CO2 has a high 

partial pressure (and high chemical 

potential), which improves the driving 

force for various types of separation 

and capture technologies. After CO2

removal, the H2 rich syngas can be 

converted to electrical or thermal 

power. One application is to use H2

as a fuel in a combustion turbine 

to generate electricity. Additional 

electricity is generated by extracting 

the energy from the combustion 

turbine flue gas via a heat recovery 

steam generator. Another application, 

currently being developed under the 

DOE Fuel Cell Program, is to utilize 

the H2 to power fuel cells with the 

intent of significantly raising overall 

plant efficiency. Because CO2 is 

present at much higher concentrations 

in syngas than in post-combustion 

flue gas, CO2 capture should be 

less expensive for pre-combustion 

capture than for post-combustion 

capture. Currently, however, there are 

few gasification plants in full-scale 

operation and capital costs are higher 

than for PC plants. 

Figure 8 shows the research pathways 

being pursued for pre-combustion 

CO2 capture. Near-term applications 

of CO2 capture from pre-combustion 

systems will likely involve physical 

or chemical absorption processes, 

with the current state-of-the-art 

being a physical glycol-based solvent 

called Selexol. Mid-term to longterm opportunities to reduce capture 

costs through improved performance 

could come from membranes and 

sorbents currently at the laboratory 

stage of development. Analysis 

conducted at NETL shows that 

CO2 capture and compression using 

Selexol raises the cost of electricity 

from a newly built IGCC power plant 

by 30 percent, from an average of 

7.8 cents/kWh to 10.2 cents/kWh. 

Research being conducted by the 

DOE Gasification Research Program 

is expected to improve gasification 

technology such that its costs without 

capture will be comparable to 

electricity costs from pulverized coal 

without capture, potentially reducing 

further the cost of pre-combustion 

CO2 capture in the future.

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 9. Post-Combustion Capture
Carbon Sequestration Technology 18Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 19

Oxygen combustion (oxycombustion). The objective of 

pulverized coal oxygen-fired 

combustion is to combust coal in an 

enriched oxygen environment using 

pure oxygen diluted with recycled 

CO2 or H2O (Figure 11). Under 

these conditions, the primary 

products of combustion are 

CO2 and H2O, and the CO2 can 

be captured by condensing the 

water in the exhaust stream. 

Oxy-combustion offers several 

additional benefits, as determined 

through large-scale laboratory 

testing and systems analysis:

• A 60-70 percent reduction in NOx

emissions compared to air-fired 

combustion, mainly due to flue 

gas recycle, but also from reduced 

thermal NOx levels due to lower 

available nitrogen. Some nitrogen 

is still available from coal nitrogen 

and air infiltrations.

• Increased mercury removal. Boiler 

tests of oxy-fuel combustion using 

Powder River Basin (PRB) coal 

resulted in increased oxidation of 

mercury, facilitating downstream 

mercury removal in the 

electrostatic precipitator and flue 

gas desulfurization systems. 

• Applicability to new and existing 

coal-fired power plants. The 

key process principles involved 

in oxy-combustion have been 

demonstrated commercially 

(including air separation and flue 

gas recycle).

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 10. Pre-Combustion Capture
20 Carbon Sequestration Technology 19Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Both pre-combustion and oxycombustion utilize air separation 

to combust coal in an enriched 

oxygen environment. However, 

it is important to note that the 

amount of oxygen required in 

oxy-combustion is significantly 

greater than in pre-combustion 

applications, increasing CO2

capture costs. Oxygen is typically 

produced using low-temperature 

(cryogenic) air separation, but 

novel oxygen separation techniques 

such as ion transport membranes 

and chemical looping systems are 

being developed to reduce costs.

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 geologic sequestration and 

terrestrial sequestration. (Figure 12).

Geologic Sequestration. Geologic 

sequestration involves the injection 

of CO2 into underground reservoirs 

that have the ability to securely 

contain it over long periods of 

time. The primary objective of 

Program research is to develop 

technologies to cost-effectively 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 11. Oxy-Combustion

store and monitor CO2 in geologic 

formations. Accomplishing this 

involves improved understanding of 

CO2 flow and trapping within the 

reservoir and the development and 

deployment of technologies such as 

simulation models and monitoring 

systems. Experience gained from 

carbon sequestration field tests will 

facilitate the development of best 

practice manuals to ensure that 

sequestration does not impair the 

geologic integrity of underground 

reservoirs, thus assuring secured 

and environmentally acceptable CO2

storage.
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 21

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 12. Carbon sequestration encompasses the processes of capture and storage of CO2
22 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Figure 13 highlights the Program 

R&D goals for the geologic storage 

research area. The goals are focused 

on reservoir characterization, 

storage potential, and large-scale 

injection, which are tied directly 

to the Program goal of achieving 

99 percent storage permanence. 

Figure 14 summarizes the critical 

challenges and R&D pathways 

related to carbon storage. Research 

is concentrated on five types of 

geologic formations, each presenting 

unique challenges and opportunities. 

These formations include oil and gas 

reservoirs, deep saline formations, 

unmineable coal seams, oil and gas 

rich organic shales, and basalts.

Oil and gas reservoirs consist of 

porous rock strata that have trapped 

crude oil or natural gas for millions 

of years. An impermeable overlying 

rock formation forms a seal that traps 

the oil and gas; the same mechanism 

would apply to CO2 storage. As a 

value-added benefit, CO2 injected 

into these reservoirs can facilitate 

recovery of oil and gas resources left 

behind by earlier recovery efforts. 

CO2 can increase oil recovery from a 

depleting reservoir by an additional 

10-20 percent of the original oil in 

place. The Program work in this 

area is focused on CO2 injection 

practices that would help maximize 

the amount of CO2 sequestered.

Saline formations are composed 

of porous rock saturated with 

brine and capped by one or more 

regionally extensive impermeable 

rock formations enabling trapping 

of injected CO2. Compared to coal 

seams or oil and gas reservoirs, 

saline formations are more common 

and offer the added benefits of 

greater proximity, higher CO2

storage capacity, and fewer existing 

well penetrations. On the other 

hand, much less is known about the 

potential of saline formations to store 

and immobilize CO2. 

Unmineable coal seams, at depths 

beyond conventional recovery 

limits, represent another promising 

opportunity for CO2 ECBM recovery. 

Most coals contain adsorbed 

methane, but will preferentially 

adsorb CO2 and desorb (release) 

methane. Similar to the byproduct value gained from EOR, 

the recovered methane provides a 

value-added revenue stream to the 

CCS process, creating a lower net 

cost option. While CO2 injection is 

known to displace methane, a greater 

understanding of the displacement 

mechanism is needed to optimize 

CO2 storage and to understand 

the problems of coal swelling and 

decreased permeability. 

CO2 storage in coal seams represents 

a promising sequestration pathway 

but research is needed along several 

fronts to overcome technical, 

economic, and environmental 

barriers: (i) storage capacity in deep, 

unmineable coal seams, including 

guidelines for defining unmineable 

coals; (ii) geologic and reservoir 

data defining favorable settings for 

injecting and storing CO2 in coal 

seams; (iii) enhanced understanding 

of the near-term and longer-term 

interactions between CO2 and coals, 

particularly the ability to model coal 

swelling (reduction of permeability) 

in the presence of CO2; (iv) reliable, 

high-volume CO2 injection strategies 

and well-spacing patterns that could 

reduce the number of wells required 

for storing significant volumes of 

CO2; and (v) integrated CO2 storage 

and ECBM recovery.

Shale, the most common type of 

sedimentary rock, is characterized 

by thin horizontal layers of rock with 

very low permeability in the vertical 

direction. Many shales contain 

1-5 percent organic material and this 

hydrocarbon material provides an 

adsorption substrate for CO2 storage, 

similar to CO2 storage in coal seams. 

Research is focused on achieving 

economically viable CO2 injection 

rates, given their generally low 

permeability.

Basalt formations are geologic 

formations of solidified lava. Basalt 

formations have a unique chemical 

makeup that could potentially 

convert all of the injected CO2 to a 

solid mineral form, thus isolating it 

from the atmosphere permanently. 

Research is focused on enhancing 

and utilizing the mineralization 

reactions and increasing CO2 flow 

within a basalt formation. Although 

oil and gas rich organic shales and 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 13. Geologic Storage Goals
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 23

basalts research is in it’s infancy, 

these formations may, in the future, 

prove to be optimal storage sites for 

stranded emissions sources.

Cross-cutting R&D Issues.

CO2 trapping mechanisms within 

geologic reservoirs. Of emerging 

importance in the field of geologic 

sequestration is the science 

of maximizing the use of CO2

trapping mechanisms. Like oil 

and natural gas, supercritical CO2

is generally less dense than the 

reservoir water and exhibits a strong 

tendency to flow upward. Over 

time, CO2 becomes less mobile 

as a combination of physical and 

geochemical trapping enhance the 

permanence of CO2 stored within a 

geologic reservoir. Finally, coal and 

other organically-rich formations 

will preferentially adsorb CO2 onto 

carbon surfaces as a function of 

reservoir pressure, thereby trapping 

CO2.

Produced water. CO2 injection for 

enhanced oil and gas recovery will 

result in salty water (brine) being 

displaced and produced at the surface. 

Produced water can be re-injected 

into deeper non-economic reservoirs, 

pooled in shallow ponds and 

evaporated, or treated and utilized for 

irrigation or other purposes. However, 

because produced water treatment is 

costly using current desalination and 

treatment technologies, alternative 

water treatment pathways are being 

explored.

Figure 14. Storage Pathways

IV. Technology Development Efforts
24 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Well integrity and higher 

productivity CO2 injection wells. 

Proper engineering of injection wells 

is vitally important for CO2 storage 

projects. Improving the integrity of 

future wells requires the development 

of novel cements, construction 

procedures to mitigate leakage, and 

sensors to monitor well integrity. In 

addition, novel drilling techniques 

for advanced wells that provide a 

high CO2 injection rate in the target 

formation should be pursued to 

reduce the number of wells needed 

for injection, thereby minimizing 

potential leakage pathways for CO2. 

Lateral well drilling capabilities, 

combined with advanced reservoir 

characterization, could also 

facilitate placement of injection 

points that allow CO2 flow through 

low permeability regions, further 

expanding CO2 storage capacity.

Terrestrial Sequestration. Terrestrial 

carbon sequestration is defined as 

the net removal of CO2 from the 

atmosphere by the soil and plants 

and/or the prevention of CO2 net 

emissions from terrestrial ecosystems 

into the atmosphere. Figure 15 

highlights the Program R&D goals 

for the terrestrial sequestration 

focus area and Figure 14 describes 

the critical challenges and R&D 

pathways.

Another important area of research 

in terrestrial sequestration is the 

development of technologies for 

quantifying carbon stored in a 

given ecosystem. Should the U.S. 

and other nations one day adopt a 

carbon emissions trading program, 

measuring techniques with high 

precision and reliability will be 

necessary. 

3. Monitoring, Mitigation, 

and Verification (MM&V)

Monitoring, mitigation, and 

verification capabilities will be 

critical in ensuring the long-term 

viability of CCS systems – satisfying 

both technical and regulatory 

requirements. Monitoring and 

verification encompass the ability to 

measure the amount of CO2 stored 

at a specific sequestration site, to 

monitor the site for leaks, to track 

the location of the underground CO2

plume, and to verify that the CO2 is 

stored in a way that is permanent and 

not harmful to the host ecosystem. 

Mitigation is the near-term ability to 

respond to risks such as CO2 leakage 

or ecological damage in the unlikely 

event that it should occur. 

The MM&V goals shown in 

Figure 16 are focused on ensuring 

permanence, which support the 

overarching Program goal of 

achieving 90 percent carbon capture 

with 99 percent storage permanence. 

In general, MM&V research is 

aimed at providing an accurate 

accounting of stored CO2 and a high 

level of confidence that the CO2 will 

remain sequestered permanently. 

A successful effort will enable 

sequestration project developers 

to obtain permits for sequestration 

projects while ensuring human health 

Program efforts in the area of 

terrestrial sequestration are focused 

on increasing carbon uptake on 

mined lands and supporting efforts 

by the RCSPs to evaluate no-till 

agriculture, reforestation, rangeland 

improvement, wetlands recovery, 

and riparian restoration. These 

activities complement collaborative 

research with the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, DOE Office of Science, 

U.S. EPA, and U.S. Department of 

the Interior. 

With respect to research on carbon 

uptake for mined lands, passage 

of the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 precipitated 

a move by coal mine operators 

to shift away from reforestation 

in favor of soil compaction and 

grass planting. However, because 

reforestation provides more carbon 

sequestration per acre of land 

than grass planting, the Program 

has funded several field tests of 

afforestation methods. Tilling 

and soil amendment approaches 

developed by the Program, for 

example, provide a 6-10 foot layer 

of loose earth that enables trees to 

take root more quickly. In some 

cases, the tilled land is amended 

with coal combustion by-products to 

reduce acidity. Field test results have 

been encouraging, demonstrating 

tree survival rates greater than 

80 percent. These approaches can 

be applied to both closure practices 

at currently operating mines and 

reclamation of the nearly 1.5 million 

acres of land in the U.S. damaged 

by past mining practices. Initial 

concerns about erosion before 

saplings become established have not 

been realized because the deep layer 

of loose soil soaks up the water.

Figure 15. Terrestrial Storage Goal

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 25

and safety and preventing potential 

damage to the host ecosystem. 

MM&V also seeks to set the stage 

for emissions reduction credits, if 

a domestic program is established, 

that approach 100 percent of injected 

CO2, contributing to the economic 

viability of sequestration projects. 

Finally, MM&V will provide 

improved information and feedback 

to sequestration practitioners, thus 

accelerating technology progress. 

Figure 17 illustrates the critical 

challenges and R&D pathways 

related to MM&V. 

Figure 16. MM&V Goals

Figure 17. MM&V Pathways

IV. Technology Development Efforts
26 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Monitoring and Verification 

Technologies for CO2 Storage in 

Geologic Formations.

Monitoring and verification activities 

for geologic sequestration encompass 

three components:

• Modeling. Modeling involves 

simulating the underground 

conditions that influence 

the behavior of CO2 injected 

into geologic formations and 

characterizing any resulting 

geomechanical changes to the 

reservoir. Comprehensive CO2

storage reservoir modeling will 

enable researchers to predict how 

CO2 plumes will flow and become 

hydrodynamically trapped in 

the short term and to understand 

the effects of chemical reactions 

(and other mechanisms) that 

will immobilize CO2 over the 

longer term. These models will 

help operators reduce the risks 

associated with inducing fractures 

in caprock and reactivating faults 

during injection. Such modeling 

capabilities engender confidence 

that injected CO2 will remain 

securely stored before injection 

commences. Comprehensive CO2

storage modeling does not just 

examine the target reservoir but 

also the potential pathways that 

fugitive CO2 may follow. The 

ability to model fluid transport 

and chemical reactions within 

geologic reservoirs already exists. 

Models are currently in use to 

manage secondary and tertiary oil 

recovery and to examine the longterm fate of industrial hazardous 

wastes disposed underground. 

Activities are underway to adapt 

these models to geologic CO2

storage. The Program seeks to 

acquire the detailed data needed 

to support reliable operation 

of these models (i.e., chemical 

reaction kinetics and twoand three-phase vapor/liquid 

equilibrium data at supercritical 

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 27

conditions) and to develop 

integrated models that support 

early small-scale pilot field tests.

• Plume tracking. Underground 

plume tracking provides the 

ability to “map” the injected CO2

and track its movement and fate 

through a reservoir. The ability to 

verify the location of injected CO2

over time is necessary to assure 

storage permanence. Seismic 

surveys (e.g., 4-D seismic, 

time-lapse vertical seismic 

profiling) and sampling from 

wells (borehole logging) are 

key technologies used for plume 

tracking. Because supercritical 

CO2 is less dense and more 

compressible than saline water, 

seismic waves travel through it at 

a different velocity. As a result of 

the velocity contrast, the presence 

of free CO2 in a saline formation 

leaves a distinct seismic signature, 

as seen at the Weyburn (Canada) 

and Frio (Texas) field sites. 

Observation wells instrumented 

to monitor reservoir conditions 

such as pressure, temperature, 

and other properties are another 

important source of information 

for plume tracking. Much can 

be learned from the monitoring 

efforts used by CO2 EOR projects 

and particularly by the gas storage 

industry. The Program work in 

this area is focused on adapting 

these technologies for use in 

CO2 sequestration applications, 

where knowledge gained from 

field tests will help optimize CO2

storage and identify the least-cost 

approach to effective MM&V.

• Leak detection. Beyond serving 

as backstops for modeling 

and plume tracking, CO2 leak 

detection systems provide 

critical measures of whether 

CO2 is escaping from the storage 

reservoir. One challenge for leak 

detection is the need to cover 

large areas cost-effectively at the 

required resolution. The CO2

plume from an injection of one 

million tons of CO2 per year in a 

deep saline formation for 20 years 

could be spread over a horizontal 

area of 15 square miles or more.

There are important interconnections 

among these three areas. Data from 

plume tracking enables validation 

of reservoir models; robust reservoir 

models enable operators to design 

and better interpret data from plume 

tracking; and models and plume 

tracking help focus leak detection 

efforts on high-risk areas. Such 

information provides a basis for 

addressing public and regulatory 

concerns and ensures that no adverse 

events are likely to occur in the 

storage formation. 

Mitigation approaches. 

The science and technology of 

remediating CO2 leakage is still 

emerging. Storing CO2 in rigorously 

selected geological formations such 

as at Weyburn (Canada), Sleipner 

(Norway), and In Salah (Algeria) 

suggest that the inherent risks and 

potential quantities of CO2 leakage 

will be minimal. In the unlikely 

event that CO2 leakage occurs, steps 

can be taken to arrest the flow of 

CO2 and mitigate the impacts. For 

example, lowering the pressure 

within the CO2 storage reservoir by 

stopping injection could reduce the 

driving force for CO2 flow and close 

a leaking fault or fracture. Other 

options include forming a “pressure 

barrier” by increasing the pressure 

in the reservoir into which CO2 is 

leaking or by intercepting the CO2

leakage paths. Another strategy is 

plugging the region where leakage 

is occurring with low permeability 

materials. Additional research in 

this area is needed, especially on 

quantifying the costs associated with 

different remedial actions.

MM&V for Terrestrial Ecosystems. 

MM&V activities focused on 

terrestrial ecosystems encompass 

three components:

• Organic matter measurement. 

Traditional methods for measuring 

carbon in terrestrial ecosystems 

(e.g., measuring tree diameters 

and analyzing soil samples 

in an off-site laboratory) are 

labor-intensive and costly. The 

Program is developing automated 

technologies that provide more 

detailed and timely information at 

lower cost for use in managing a 

sequestration site.

• Soil carbon measurement. Soil 

carbon offers the potential for 

long-term CO2 storage. The 

Program is developing automated 

technologies for measuring soil 

carbon.

• Modeling. Detailed models are 

used to extrapolate the results 

of carbon uptake activities from 

random samples to an entire plot 

and to estimate the net increase 

in carbon storage relative to a 

case without enhanced carbon 

uptake. Economic models show 

accumulations of emissions 

credits and revenues versus an 

initial investment.

These three components have a vital 

role in proving the permanence of 

CO2 storage in terrestrial ecosystems. 

Continued research is needed, 

particularly since quantifying 

CO2 leakage rates from terrestrial 

ecosystems using current technology 

IV. Technology Development Efforts
28 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

is more challenging than identifying 

leaks in geologic storage formations. 

In addition, the development of robust 

and flexible accounting protocols 

that function within future regulatory 

and market regimes is critical to the 

verification of long-term storage in 

terrestrial ecosystems.

Accounting protocols. 

Monitoring and measurement 

systems must provide certainty to 

project owners, regulators and the 

global environmental community 

that sequestration projects are 

achieving and sustaining expected 

levels of CO2 permanence. A 

key challenge facing the carbon 

sequestration community, therefore, 

is the development of robust, 

equitable, and transparent accounting 

Two large sources of methane and 

GHGs in the U.S. – landfills and 

coal mines – represent priority 

R&D pathways for the Carbon 

Sequestration Program (Figure 18). 

In one pathway, the produced 

methane is combusted, reducing 

the carbon’s GHG effect by a factor 

of ten. In the other pathway, the 

produced methane is captured and 

utilized. 

Landfill gas is typically a 50/50 

mixture of methane and CO2, 

with trace amounts of heavier 

hydrocarbons. The Program is 

exploring methods to enhance the 

biological utilization of methane 

in landfill covers and studying 

management practices at bioreactor 

landfills to control the conditions 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

mechanisms with the flexibility to 

function within future regulatory and 

market regimes.

4. Non-CO2 Greenhouse 

Gas Control

According to the EIA, nonCO2

 greenhouse gas emissions 

contributed 16 percent of the total 

U.S. GHG emissions in 2005. Since 

many non-CO2 greenhouse gases 

(e.g., methane, nitrous oxide, and 

certain refrigerants) have significant 

economic value, emissions can often 

be captured or avoided at low net 

cost. The Carbon Sequestration 

Program aims to tap the economic 

value of fugitive methane emissions 

by developing innovative capture and 

gas upgrading technologies. 
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 29

within the landfill to promote or 

suppress methane production. The 

Program is also exploring techniques 

to enhance methane capture and 

use for energy generation, including 

the injection of landfill gas into 

unmineable coal seams to harness 

the natural ability of coal to adsorb 

CO2, thus replacing and releasing 

methane for ECBM. 

Methane emissions from coal mines 

represent about 10 percent of U.S. 

anthropogenic methane emissions. 

Ventilation air methane (VAM) 

is the largest source of coal mine 

methane – accounting for about 

half of the methane emitted from 

5. Breakthrough Concepts

DOE is committed to fostering the 

innovative potential of industry 

and academia. The Breakthrough 

Concepts focus area serves as an 

incubator for CO2 capture, storage, and 

conversion concepts with the potential 

to provide step-change improvements 

in process efficiency, energy use, and 

cost. Figure 19 illustrates some of the 

research pathways being pursued in 

the Breakthrough Concepts focus area. 

In October 2006, DOE announced 

the selection of nine projects aimed 

at developing novel and cost-effective 

technologies for CO2 capture from 

coal-fired power plants. Two of 

these projects have matured from 

Breakthrough Concepts selections 

under a 2004 joint DOE/National 

Academies of Science (NAS) 

solicitation to the Core R&D CO2

Capture focus area, where they 

will be advanced to the pre-pilot 

scale. One project will focus on the 

development of a new class of liquid 

absorbents called ionic liquids for 

efficient post-combustion capture of 

CO2 from coal-fired power plants. 

The other project will develop a 

process that uses novel microporous 

metal organic frameworks having 

extremely high adsorption capacities 

for the removal of CO2 from coalfired power plant flue gas. The 

Program also supports research in 

membranes and mineralization, 

including a project to create microbes 

that biologically sequester CO2 by 

converting it to other value-added 

chemicals that have use in certain 

drug compounds, agricultural and 

food production, and biodegradable 

plastics.

U.S. coal mines. The Program 

is pursuing technologies to costeffectively convert the methane in 

coal mine ventilation air to CO2. 

Methane can also be recovered from 

mine degasification systems, where 

methane concentrations are much 

higher (30-90 percent) than in coal 

mine VAM (0.3-1.5 percent). Here, 

the Program aims to develop and 

deploy cost-effective technologies 

to upgrade gas to pipeline quality 

specifications. The Program is 

collaborating with the U.S. EPA, 

which has both coal mine methane 

and landfill gas outreach programs. 

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 18. Non-CO2 GHG Pathways
30 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

B. Regional Carbon

Sequestration Partnerships

1. Overview

Geographic differences in fossil fuel 

use and potential sequestration storage 

sites across the U.S. dictate the use 

of regional approaches in addressing 

CO2 sequestration. DOE has created 

a network of seven Regional Carbon 

Sequestration Partnerships to develop 

the technology, infrastructure, and 

regulations necessary to implement 

CO2 sequestration in different regions 

of the Nation. Underlying this 

regional partnership approach is the 

belief that local entities, organizations, 

and citizens will contribute expertise, 

experience, and perspectives that 

more accurately represent the 

concerns and desires of a given 

region, resulting in the development 

and application of technologies better 

suited to that region. 

Collectively, the seven RCSPs represent 

regions encompassing 97 percent of 

coal-fired CO2 emissions, 97 percent of 

industrial CO2 emissions, 96 percent of 

the total land mass, and essentially all 

the geologic sequestration sites in the 

U.S. potentially available for carbon 

storage. The RCSPs are evaluating 

numerous sequestration approaches to 

assess which approaches are best suited 

for specific regions of the country and 

are developing the framework needed 

to validate and potentially deploy the 

most promising CCS technologies. 

The two sequestration options that 

have evolved from the Core R&D 

element as priorities for near-term 

deployment are: 

• Geologic Sequestration – CO2

injection into different geologic 

formations including depleted oil 

and natural gas fields, unmineable 

coal seams, saline formations, 

shale, and basalt outcrops

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 19. Breakthrough Concepts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 31

• Terrestrial Sequestration – carbon 

sequestration in soils and organic 

material through the restoration 

of agricultural fields, grasslands, 

rangeland, wetlands, and forests 

or by altering the management of 

these assets

Among the seven RCSP Regions, 

geologic sequestration sites differ 

in their lithology as well as their 

locations relative to CO2 emission 

sources and pipelines. Some regions 

have an abundance of different 

types of geologic formations, while 

opportunities in other regions are 

dominated by a specific formation 

type. Terrestrial sequestration 

options vary across regions based on 

differences in average temperature, 

topography, soil type, amount of 

rainfall, and other factors.

The process of sequestering carbon 

dioxide involves identifying sources 

that produce CO2 and identifying 

sequestration sites where the 

CO2 can be stored. Based on 

data assembled for the Carbon 

Sequestration Atlas of the United 

States and Canada, Table 1 shows 

that 4,365 identified stationary 

sources in the seven RCSP Regions 

and the northeastern U.S. generate 

about 3.809 billion metric tons of 

CO2 annually. The aggregate CO2

sink capacity – including saline 

formations, unmineable coal seams, 

and oil and natural gas reservoirs 

– is estimated to range up to 

3,643 billion metric tons, enough to 

sequester CO2 emissions at current 

annual generation rates for hundreds 

of years. The formation maps in 

Figure 20 show the geographic 

locations of these CO2 sources and 

potential geologic sequestration 

sites.

The RCSPs include more than 350 

organizations and span 41 states, 

three Indian nations, and four 

Canadian provinces. The partners 

include utilities, oil and natural 

gas companies, ethanol producers, 

agricultural industry, other industrial 

partners, state and local government 

organizations, regional universities, 

national laboratories, and special 

interest groups representing 

industrial and environmental 

communities. Table 2 provides 

website, acronym, lead organization, 

and geographic coverage information 

for the RCSPs.

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Table 1. Capacity Estimates of CO2 Sources and Geologic Sequestration Sites
32 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Figure 20. Maps for CO2 Sources and Geologic Sequestration Sites

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 33

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Table 2. Regional Partnerships
34 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Each of the RCSPs is described below in terms of participating organizations, 

strategic focus on field testing, and types of CO2 storage opportunities being 

evaluated.

The Big Sky Carbon Sequestration Partnership (Big Sky) is comprised 

of 66 partners and native American tribes. The Big Sky Partnership has 

extensive basalt formations, saline formations, and oil and natural gas 

reservoirs that could be used as storage sites. Geologic field tests are planned 

in deep saline and depleted oil fields. The Big Sky Partnership is also 

exploring the Region’s potential to store CO2 in agricultural soils, rangeland 

soils, and forests. Three terrestrial tests are planned to examine CO2 uptake.

The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) is comprised 

of 21 partners and is assessing the ability of geological formations in the 

Illinois Basin to store CO2 in unmineable coal seams, mature oil fields, and 

deep saline formations. Highly favorable storage areas may exist in this 

Region since two or more potential CO2 sink types are vertically stacked in 

some localities. MGSC will also investigate CO2 capture technologies and 

the costs of transporting large quantities of CO2 via pipeline. Six small pilot 

projects will evaluate EOR by CO2 flooding, CO2 sequestration in unmineable 

coal seams, and CO2 injection into deep saline formations up to 10,000 feet 

below the Earth’s surface.

The Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) has 

36 partners and is determining the CO2 storage potential of various geologic 

formations, particularly saline formations. MRCSP will conduct three CO2

injection field tests in deep geologic formations in the Region to demonstrate 

the safety and effectiveness of geologic sequestration systems. MRCSP will 

also conduct three terrestrial sequestration field tests to explore how naturally 

stored carbon can be measured and monitored and how carbon credits could 

be traded in voluntary GHG markets.

The Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership (PCOR) consists of 63 partners 

working to demonstrate the potential of depleted oil fields, and unmineable 

lignite coals to store CO2 emissions. Geologic tests are planned in the oilbearing Keg River and Duperow formations in Alberta province and North 

Dakota, respectively, while a coal seam sequestration test is planned for the 

Williston Basin in North Dakota. The Partnership also plans to demonstrate 

that carbon can be stored in the native grasslands and through the restoration 

of wetlands. Terrestrial field tests are planned for the Great Plains Prairie 

Pothole wetlands complex.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 35

The Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB)

has 77 partners working to characterize carbon sources and potential 

sequestration sites in the Southeast; identify the most promising capture, 

sequestration, and transport options; and address issues for technology 

deployment. SECARB will conduct four geologic sequestration field 

tests covering EOR stacked formations along the Gulf Coast, coal seam 

sequestration and coalbed methane recovery, and saline formations.

The Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) has 

52 partners in eight states, including the Navajo nation. SWP is investigating 

a variety of carbon sink targets. The Partnership will leverage 30 years of 

EOR experience in the Region to determine the potential of oil, coal, and 

saline formations to store CO2 emissions. Field testing of ECBM production 

with carbon sequestration is planned. The Partnership is also investigating 

the potential of terrestrial systems in the Southwest to store CO2, including a 

riparian restoration project using produced water from the ECBM field test.

The West Coast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

(WESTCARB) is comprised of 78 partners dedicated to evaluating regional 

CCS opportunities. The Partnership is examining the sequestration potential 

in depleted oil, unmineable coal, and deep saline formations. One EOR 

and saline storage test is planned in California and one saline storage test in 

Arizona. Terrestrial sequestration pilot projects will be conducted in Oregon 

and California. The Partnership will also investigate the use of reforestation 

and fire suppression to mitigate CO2 emissions.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
36 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

2. RCSP Program

The RCSP Program was initiated in 

September 2003 through an open 

competitive solicitation process that 

required a minimum 20 percent cost 

share from the prospective awardees. 

As Figure 21 illustrates, the RCSP 

Program is being implemented in 

three interrelated phases. Levels of 

DOE funding without cost shares are 

shown.

• Characterization Phase 

(FY 2003 – FY 2005)

• Validation Phase 

(FY 2005 – FY 2009)

• Deployment Phase 

(FY 2008 – FY 2017)

Actual cost shares for the RCSPs 

through the Characterization and 

Validation Phases have ranged from 

the 20 percent minimum to as high 

as 52 percent. As a group, the seven 

RCSPs have provided more than 

31 percent in cost sharing through 

the first two phases.

Even though the RCSP Program is 

being implemented in three phases, 

it should be viewed as an integrated 

whole, with many of the goals and 

objectives transitioning from one 

phase to the next. Accomplishments 

and results from the Characterization 

Phase have helped to refine goals and 

activities in the Validation Phase, and 

results from the Validation Phase are 

expected to flow into and enhance 

the Deployment Phase. 

The RCSP Program encourages and 

requires open information sharing 

among its members. DOE and 

the RCSPs sponsor both general 

workshops and more focused 

technology area Working Group 

meetings to facilitate information 

exchange. These meetings are 

important tools that strengthen the 

overall RCSP Program. Although 

each RCSP has its own objectives 

and field tests, mutual cooperation 

has been an important part of the 

Program to date. These workshops 

and formal Working Group 

activities were initiated during 

the Characterization Phase, have 

continued into the Validation Phase, 

and will likely be an important 

aspect of the Deployment Phase as 

well.

3. Characterization Phase

The Characterization Phase, 

completed in 2005, focused on 

characterizing regional opportunities 

for carbon capture and storage, 

identifying regional CO2 sources, 

and identifying priority opportunities 

for field tests. Each RCSP developed 

decision support systems that house 

regional geologic data on CO2

IV. Technology Development Efforts

Figure 21. Regional Partnership Phases
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 37

storage sites and information on CO2

sources to complete source-sink 

matching models. Each RCSP also 

researched project tools necessary 

to model and measure the fate 

and spread of CO2 after injection. 

Combined with public outreach and 

education programs conducted by the 

RCSPs during the Characterization 

Phase, these activities show that 

CCS is a viable option to mitigate 

CO2 emissions. In preparation of the 

Validation and Deployment Phases, 

the RCSPs gathered data necessary 

to prepare and conduct geologic and 

terrestrial field tests, and made the 

following key accomplishments:

• Established a national network 

of companies and professionals 

working to support sequestration 

deployments. The RCSPs brought 

an enormous amount of capability 

and experience together to work 

on the challenge of infrastructure 

development. Together with 

DOE, the RCSPs secured the 

active participation of more than 

500 individuals representing more 

than 350 industrial companies, 

engineering firms, state agencies, 

non-governmental organizations, 

and other supporting 

organizations.

• Raised awareness and support for 

CCS as a GHG mitigation option. 

Each RCSP developed creative 

and innovative approaches to 

outreach and education. Articles 

about sequestration have been 

placed in local newspapers, 

documentaries have been shown 

on public television, and several 

people involved in the RCSPs 

made appearances on local 

television programs. All seven 

RCSPs developed websites that 

describe their activities and 

several RCSPs experimented 

with innovative, internet-based 

outreach efforts, including a 

modified chat room for fielding 

questions about sequestration and 

town hall style meetings.

• Advanced understanding of 

permitting requirements for 

future CCS projects. To comply 

with public and regulatory 

requirements and to address 

possible safety and environmental 

risks, CCS projects will require 

permits. Working in collaboration 

with the Interstate Oil and Gas 

Compact Commission (IOGCC) 

and in consultation with the 

U.S. EPA, the RCSPs assessed 

requirements and procedures for 

permitting future commercial 

sequestration deployments.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
38 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

• Identified priority opportunities 

for sequestration field tests. The 

RCSPs identified high priority 

opportunities within their Regions 

that target select field tests during 

the Validation Phase.

• Established a series of protocols 

for project implementation, 

accounting, and contracts. RCSP 

activities in this area focused on 

the development of accounting 

protocols and support for state or 

national GHG accounting registries.

4. Validation Phase

The Validation Phase focuses on 

field tests to validate the efficacy 

of CCS technologies in a variety 

of geologic and terrestrial storage 

sites throughout the U.S. and 

Canada. Using the extensive data 

and information gathered during 

the Characterization Phase, the 

seven RCSPs identified the most 

promising opportunities for carbon 

sequestration in their Regions and 

are performing 25 geologic field tests 

(Figure 22) and 11 terrestrial field 

tests (Figure 23). In addition, the 

RCSPs are verifying regional CO2

sequestration capacities, satisfying 

project permitting requirements, 

and conducting public outreach and 

education activities.

The first four geologic projects 

listed in Figure 22 are large-scale 

injections where a commercial 

partner is already injecting CO2

into depleted oil reservoirs and 

unmineable coal seams for EOR 

and/or ECBM recovery applications. 

The partner is focusing its efforts 

to determine the fate of the injected 

CO2 through predictive modeling and 

monitoring activities. The remaining 

projects will involve injection of a 

relatively small amount of CO2 into 

unmineable coal seams, oil and 

natural gas reservoirs, and saline 

formations to assess the sequestration 

potential of these geologic sites. 

The RCSPs are working to develop 

injection and monitoring wells, 

coordinate injection operations, 

conduct reservoir modeling, and 

monitor the fate of the CO2. In 

addition, the RCSPs are conducting 

public outreach activities and satisfying 

the necessary permit applications. To 

successfully conduct these geologic 

field tests, the RCSPs are collaborating 

with industrial partners that are 

providing the financial and technical 

support necessary for the success of 

the program.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 39

Figure 22. Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Validation Phase Geologic Field Tests

IV. Technology Development Efforts
40 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

Figure 23. Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Validation Phase Terrestrial Field Tests

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 41

The field tests conducted during 

the Validation Phase address the 

following goals: 

• Validate and refine current CO2

reservoir models for various 

geologic sequestration sites 

• Collect physical data to confirm 

capacity and injectivity estimates 

made during the Characterization 

Phase

• Demonstrate the effectiveness of 

MM&V technologies to measure 

CO2 movement in the reservoirs and 

confirm the integrity of the seals

• Develop guidelines for well 

completion, operations, and 

abandonment to maximize storage 

potential and mitigate leakage 

• Develop strategies that can be 

used to optimize the storage 

capacity for various sink types 

To achieve these primary Validation 

Phase goals, each RCSP has further 

established its own supporting goals. 

Many of these supporting goals and 

actions were created as a logical 

continuation of goals completed 

and/or specific accomplishments 

attained during the Characterization 

Phase. The RCSPs are part of a 

programmatic initiative that is 

closely coordinated through DOE 

and the Working Groups. 

In addition to the goals related 

to the field test projects, the 

RCSPs continue to improve on 

the work conducted during the 

Characterization Phase. The 

RCSPs will update information 

collected on CO2 stationary sources 

and potential sequestration sites 

as additional data and analytical 

procedures become available. A 

common economic modeling 

approach for CO2 capture will be 

developed based on preliminary 

economic models of available and 

emerging capture technologies 

created during the Characterization 

Phase. Storage capacity estimates 

for saline formations will be refined 

in the Validation Phase and beyond 

using a common methodology 

developed by the RCSPs during 

the Characterization Phase. 

Instrumentation evaluated and tested 

during the Characterization Phase 

to follow CO2 injection, plume 

migration, and leak detection will 

be used to develop protocols for site 

selection and monitoring.

5. Deployment Phase

The Deployment Phase, scheduled 

to begin in FY 2008 and run 

through FY 2017, will demonstrate 

at large scale that CO2 capture, 

transportation, injection, and storage 

can be achieved safely, permanently, 

and economically. DOE will provide 

up to $470M in federal support 

for the RCSPs over 10 years. An 

additional 20 percent cost share will 

be provided by each RCSP. 

These large-volume deployment 

tests will provide concurrent input 

to the FutureGen Initiative, which 

will produce both hydrogen and 

electricity from a highly efficient 

and technologically sophisticated 

power plant while capturing and 

sequestering the CO2 emissions. 

The geologic structures to be 

tested during these large-volume 

sequestration tests could become 

candidate sites for future near zero 

emissions power plants.

The primary goal of the Deployment 

Phase is the development of largescale CCS projects across North 

America, where large volumes 

of CO2 will be injected into a 

geologic formation representative 

of a relatively large storage capacity 

for each Region. The injection 

will continue over several years. 

Recognizing that CO2 sources vary 

widely from Region to Region and 

that some Regions will have limited 

access to large volumes of CO2, 

injection volumes may vary. The 

RCSPs, however, will be expected 

to maximize CO2 injection volumes 

that fully utilize the infrastructure 

of the Region. Projects that procure 

CO2 from natural gas processing 

plants or natural vents may inject one 

million tons or more of CO2 per year, 

depending upon cost and availability.

The Deployment Phase tests will be 

implemented in three stages which 

will test key technologies during 

the demonstration and deployment: 

(1) site selection, characterization, 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) compliance, permitting, and 

infrastructure development; (2) CO2

injection and monitoring operations; 

and (3) site closure, post injection 

monitoring, and analysis. While 

projects in the Validation Phase are 

designed to demonstrate that regional 

sequestration sites have the potential 

to store thousands of years’ worth of 

CO2 emissions in the U.S., the largevolume sequestration tests in the 

Deployment Phase will also address 

practical issues such as sustainable 

injectivity, well design for both 

integrity and increased capacity, and 

reservoir behavior with respect to 

prolonged injection. Such issues can 

only be addressed by scaling up the 

size and duration of sequestration 

projects. Key operational issues and 

lessons learned will vary since each 

Region will have different geologic 

formations, overlying seals, and 

structural issues that can affect the 

safe and effective storage of CO2 for 

millennia.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
42 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

C. NETL Office of

Research and Development

NETL conducts carbon capture and 

storage R&D through its Office of 

Research and Development (ORD) 

in four focus areas – Computational 

and Basic Sciences, Energy 

System Dynamics, Geological and 

Environmental Systems, and Materials 

Science – that build upon NETL R&D 

strengths and address long-range issues 

central to continued fossil fuel use. 

Science-based research and analysis 

in areas relating specifically to CCS is 

conducted within the Geological and 

Environmental Systems focus area 

and is known as the NETL Carbon 

Management Research Program. 

Using in-house facilities and 

resources, researchers in the Carbon 

Management Research Program 

conduct the research and analysis 

needed to develop energy-efficient 

and cost-effective methods that can 

manage CO2 emissions from energy 

production. NETL has established 

unique Centers of Research in carbon 

capture, permanent storage, and risk 

assessment associated with CCS 

technology development. These 

Centers of Research directly support 

the Carbon Sequestration Program 

as well as collaborative efforts with 

the RCSPs. Examples of ongoing 

interactions between the Centers of 

Research and the RCSPs include 

risk assessments with the Southwest 

Regional Partnership, CO2 storage 

verification in coal seams with the 

Southeast and Southwest Regional 

Partnerships, and coal swelling 

modeling with the Midwest Geological 

Sequestration Consortium.

The NETL Center for Carbon Capture 

develops and evaluates breakthrough 

approaches that have the potential to 

substantially reduce the complexity 

and energy intensity of CO2 capture. 

Research in this Center focuses on 

novel or revolutionary approaches that 

remove CO2 during energy production 

rather than scrubbing or eliminating 

it from a by-product stream. The 

development of membranes to 

separate CO2 from combustion gases 

is one example of this research; once 

separated, the CO2 is easily captured 

and can then be sequestered. Oxyfuel firing is another process under 

development, whereby CO2 can be 

separated from exhaust gases by 

simply condensing out the water. 

Researchers often use a combination 

of laboratory studies and numerical 

models to evaluate novel approaches 

to carbon capture. Relying on their 

expertise in modeling and simulation, 

researchers extrapolate laboratory 

findings to projected applications 

before engaging in large-scale testing. 

The Center for Permanent 

Storage is researching several CO2

storage verification techniques, 

including soil gas measurements; 

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 43

characterization of surface fault 

exposures; computer tomography 

scanning of cores to assess fractures 

and rate of diffusion of CO2 into 

the strata; groundwater sampling 

and analysis; aeromagnetic flyover 

surveys for existing and abandoned 

wells, and adsorption isotherm 

studies of relevant strata. These 

technologies are currently in use 

at RCSP field sites to ensure that 

permanent storage of CO2 is attained 

at low cost, with low environmental 

impact, and in conformity with 

national and international laws. In 

support of the RCSP efforts to select 

sequestration sites and estimate 

storage capacity, the Center for 

Permanent Storage is developing 

a suite of modeling techniques 

to quantify CO2 flows in deep 

subsurface reservoirs, through 

intermediate strata, and near the 

ground surface. Models under 

development include near-surface 

modeling of CO2 flow to aid in 

designing and interpreting results 

from monitoring networks, modeling 

of flow through actual fractures to 

better understand flow phenomena, 

and unique fracture generation and 

flow simulation software to model 

flow through intermediate strata and 

through the target reservoir.

The Center for Risk Assessment is 

working to identify risks associated 

with the permanent storage of CO2. 

A main component of the Center’s 

risk assessment activity will be to 

identify the risks associated with 

field projects through the use of 

features, processes, events, and 

models that have been developed for 

risk assessments elsewhere. Initially, 

the analyses will be based on the 

field sequestration projects being 

undertaken by the RCSPs. This 

approach will correlate modeling 

and monitoring techniques with the 

risk assessment model to identify 

potential events and probabilities 

of events affecting CO2 storage. 

Development of a carbon storage risk 

assessment capability is expected 

to provide a valuable tool that can 

be used to support the performance 

of environmental assessments and 

impact studies of carbon capture 

and long-term storage options. Risk 

assessment results will also help in 

informing the public about the safety 

of carbon capture and storage.

ORD efforts offer in-depth scientific 

expertise that can be applied to the 

development of new technologies, 

processes, and models that are 

IV. Technology Development Efforts
44 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

essential in meeting long-term 

program goals. It provides an 

impartial evaluation of new concepts, 

products, and materials that may 

be considered by the RCSPs for 

deployment, and offers a venue 

for participation in collaborative 

research by other research 

organizations (e.g., other national 

laboratories, universities, and 

technology developers). 

D. Supporting Mechanisms

A number of supporting mechanisms 

contribute to the Carbon Sequestration 

Program and enhance its ability to 

meet Program objectives.

1. International 

Collaboration 

The U.S. believes that technology 

provides the key to reduce GHG 

emissions. Formed in 2003, the 

Carbon Sequestration Leadership 

Forum is one such technology 

forum. CSLF international members 

engage in cooperative technology 

development aimed at enabling 

the early reduction and steady 

elimination of CO2 emissions from 

electricity generation and other 

heavy industrial activity. Members 

are dedicated to collaboration and 

information sharing to foster the 

worldwide deployment of multiple 

technologies for the capture and 

long-term geologic storage of CO2

and to establishing a companion 

foundation of legislative, regulatory, 

administrative, and institutional 

practices that will ensure safe, 

verifiable storage for millennia. The 

CSLF technology roadmap identifies 

research and development pathways 

that lead to commercially viable 

carbon capture and sequestration 

systems.

The CSLF has recognized 17 

international research, development, 

and demonstration projects to 

advance technologies for lowcost CCS. DOE’s efforts in the 

sequestration arena are recognized 

by the formal endorsement of 

FutureGen and the RCSP field tests 

as CSLF projects.

2. Systems and Benefits 

Analyses

Systems analyses and economic 

modeling of potential new processes 

provide crucial guidance to R&D 

efforts investigating a wide range of 

CO2 capture options. Because many 

of the technologies developed by the 

Program are being investigated at 

the laboratory or pilot-scale, systems 

analyses offer an opportunity to 

visualize how these new technologies 

might fit in a full-scale power plant 

and identify potential integration 

issues. Analytical results enable 

decision makers to determine which 

technologies merit continued funding 

and how research can be modified to 

enhance technology success at fullscale. 

Modeling tools aid systems analysis 

efforts. For example, the Integrated 

Environmental Control Model 

(IECM) enables systematic cost and 

performance analyses of emission 

control equipment at coal-fired 

power plants. Users can evaluate 

plant configurations using a variety 

of pollutant control technologies, 

including options for CO2 capture 

(amine and Selexol scrubber, 

water-gas shift reactor, and O2-

CO2 recycle), pipeline transport, 

and storage. The Program also 

participates in cross-cutting studies 

to consider how sequestration might 

help meet future CO2 emissions 

reductions goals. These broader 

efforts often rely on large models 

such as the DOE National Energy 

Modeling System (NEMS).

3. Interagency Coordination 

In each sequestration research area, 

DOE collaborates closely with other 

agencies. For example, in the area 

of terrestrial sequestration, the 

Program is working closely with the 

U.S. Forest Service and the Office 

of Surface Mining. To prepare for 

the Validation Phase of the RCSPs, 

DOE has met regularly with the 

U.S. EPA and various state and local 

governments on regulatory issues. 

Of particular interest, the Carbon 

Sequestration Program collaborated 

with the National Academy of 

Sciences in 2003 and 2004 to bolster 

R&D efforts in Breakthrough 

Concepts. A workshop hosted by 

DOE and the National Research 

Council (NRC) identified priorities 

for breakthrough research, and a 

subsequent solicitation produced a 

pool of more than 100 proposals. 

Eight awards were made in March 

2004 and research work is proceeding. 

Information from the workshop was 

also used in a funding opportunity 

announcement on capture technology 

released in FY 2006.

4. Education and Outreach 

Carbon capture and storage is 

a relatively new scientific and 

technology discipline; as such, many 

people are unaware of its role as a 

GHG mitigation strategy. Increased 

education and awareness are needed 

to improve its acceptance by the 

general public, regulatory agencies, 

policy makers, and industry, 

IV. Technology Development Efforts
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 45

and to enable future commercial 

deployment of advanced carbon 

sequestration technology. Activities 

highlighting the Program education 

and outreach efforts include:

• Carbon Sequestration webpage on 

the NETL website (http://www.

netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_

seq/index.html)

• Carbon Sequestration Technology 

Roadmap and Program Plan – 

revised annually (http://www.netl.

doe.gov/publications/carbon_seq/

refshelf.html)

• Carbon Sequestration Newsletter 

– distributed monthly (http://

www.netl.doe.gov/publications/

carbon_seq/subscribe.html)

• Middle School and High School 

Educational Curricula on GHG 

Mitigation Options – disseminated 

through workshops at National 

Science Teacher Association 

conferences (http://www.

keystonecurriculum.org/)

• Carbon Offsets Opportunity 

Program website

(http://www.offsetopportunity.com)

• The annual National Conference 

on Carbon Capture and 

Sequestration.

(http://www.carbonsq.com/)

In addition, the Program 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 

technological challenges facing 

sequestration and foster discussions 

regarding some of the more 

complicated issues underlying CCS 

technology.

Many of the Program R&D projects 

have their own outreach component. 

For example, the RCSPs engage 

regulators, policy makers, and 

interested citizens at the state and 

local level through innovative 

outreach mechanisms. The RCSPs 

also implement action plans for 

public education in the form of 

mailing lists, public meetings, 

media advertising, local interviews, 

and education programs available 

at libraries, schools, and local 

businesses.

IV. Technology Development Efforts
46 Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007

National Energy Technology Laboratory

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

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy

http://www.doe.gov/sciencetech/carbonsequestration.htm

Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum

http://www.cslforum.org/

West Coast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

http://www.westcarb.org/

Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration

http://www.southwestcarbonpartnership.org/

Big Sky Carbon Sequestration Partnership

http://www.bigskyco2.org/

Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership

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

Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium

http://www.sequestration.org/

Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

http://198.87.0.58/default.aspx

Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

http://www.secarbon.org/

Carbon Sequestration-Related Web Pages

For More Information
Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2007	 47

* Point of contact for the roadmap and program plan, 

and references document. 

National Energy Technology Laboratory

Strategic Center for Coal

Office of Fossil Energy

Sean Plasynski

412-386-4867

sean.plasynski@netl.doe.gov

Dawn Deel *

304-285-4133 

dawn.deel@netl.doe.gov

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Coal and Power Systems

Office of Fossil Energy

Lowell Miller

301-903-9451

lowell.miller@hq.doe.gov

Bob Kane

202-586-4753

robert.kane@hq.doe.gov

If you have any questions, comments, or would like more information about DOE’s Carbon 

Sequestration Program, please contact the following persons:

for More Information
National Energy 

Technology Laboratory

1450 Queen Avenue SW

Albany, OR 97321-2198

541-967-5892

2175 University Avenue South, Suite 201

Fairbanks, AK 99709

907-452-2559

3610 Collins Ferry Road

P.O. Box 880

Morgantown, WV 26507-0880

304-285-4764

626 Cochrans Mill Road

P.O. Box 10940

Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940

412-386-4687

One West Third Street, Suite 1400

Tulsa, OK 74103-3519

918-699-2000

Visit the NETL website at:

www.netl.doe.gov

Customer Service:

1-800-553-7681

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Fossil Energy

Printed in the United States on recycled paper 

April 2007