Carbon Capture Legislation

Remove carbon from the equation...just the ability to steal private land is absurd

To top it off the carbon capture will be paid for by the taxpayers. The projects are so they can apply the carbon credits to other carbon producing activities the company does. These carbon credits then allow them lower the companies tax burden. It is all one giant scheme to fleece tax payers. The whole governmental system needs to implode.

Why wouldn't we give our land to corporations? Seems fair.

One Volcano fart can offset years of carbon capture by all the carbon capture corporations combined. Frick it's Claude Cooper from Cleveland! I personally prefer a warmer greener Earth. We are pretty resilient with heat, but colder scenario not so much.

Carbon capture is the biggest fraud out on the citizens. They are using tax payer money for something so dumb to show that they “support the environment”. No telling who is pocketing the money under the table from these stupid things

The following Republican representatives voted to strip LA citizens of their property rights.

Joseph Orgeron - District 54
Paul Sawyer - District 69
Jacob Braud - District 105
Timothy Kerner - District 84
Jeremy LaCombe - District 18
Jacob Landry - District 49
Neil Riser - District 20
Jessica Domangue - District 53
Jerome Zeringue - District 52

quote:

---

Carbon capture is the biggest money making scheme on the current agenda and is not rooted in science.

---

Its a scheme created by Global elitist and environmentalist along with our politicians. The oil and gas companies didn't create or push for this market. They're just the only ones that have the resources and assets to take advantage of it.

It's prevalent here because of our abundance of NG, existing pipeline infrastructure, and suitable geology.

0.04% of air is CO2

If we had less than 0.02% CO2 in the atmosphere desertification would be much worse as plants would then only grow in more restricted parts of the world.

The models for estimating temperature changes have a wide range of error and have not been accurate. If you read Gore's "Earth in the Balance" there were clear predictions that have failed (including temperature and desertification).

That's essentially hypothesis testing in action. With a result contradictory to the stated truth.

The amount of CO2 in the planet's atmosphere was much higher millenia ago. In the Jurassic period around 0.2% and 0.4% in the Cambrian. The manmade greenhouse discussion doesn't just ignore the times when it has been higher it also ignores times when temperatures grew colder at the same time CO2 was higher.

It might be worth questioning the entire premise of the climate apocalypse types. Because they have been great at generating media attention and government funding but terrible at the type of accurate predictions that would make them legitimate scientists.

quote:

---

Find me a single voter in the entire state who doesn’t have a financial interest in this

---

I think this is the real question. Other than the LNG industry EVERYONE benefits from CCS policies in the state of LA.

LNG doesn't benefit because the two are in direct competition with each other.

quote:

---

As of late 2025, Louisiana is positioning itself as a hub for carbon capture and storage (CCS), with projected capital investments ranging from over $20 billion to upwards of $76 billion, depending on the scope of projects included. These projects, spurred by federal 45Q tax credits and state support, aim to decarbonize industrial sectors like chemical manufacturing

---