Started By
Message

re: Carbon Capture

Posted on 1/16/25 at 4:48 am to
Posted by cadillacattack
the ATL
Member since May 2020
9645 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 4:48 am to
What a grift ….
Posted by DMAN1968
Member since Apr 2019
12623 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 5:01 am to
quote:

They have to have a hearing before the state mineral board. You will get notice of the hearing if your property is affected.


The people around Lake Maurepas didn't get a notice.
Posted by stelly1025
Lafayette
Member since May 2012
9900 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 5:02 am to
Utter nonsense... My Conspiracy Theory is that this is the digital infrastructure that they are trying to bring in for CBDCs, social credit scores, and a complete and total surveillance state like they have in China. They are hiding it behind climate change nonsense. It's a front.
Posted by DTRooster
Belle River, La
Member since Dec 2013
8893 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 5:15 am to
Just another way to steal tax money and further burden the working man.
Posted by DreauxB2015
Member since Nov 2015
7912 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 5:23 am to
How does this work ? Will cars pull up to Surface tree and connect a hose to the exhaust pipe ? This is joke btw
This post was edited on 1/16/25 at 5:26 am
Posted by NC_Tigah
Make Orwell Fiction Again
Member since Sep 2003
135725 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 5:35 am to
quote:

Carbon Capture

What’s the boards opinion on this?
Benefits of this type of carbon capture and witch burnings have about the same scientific basis.
Posted by fjlee90
Baton Rouge
Member since Nov 2016
8519 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 6:01 am to
quote:

To a point. Remember your p-chem.


J-Hop, fall 2010.

He knew the class was pointless for chemical engineers so he proposed a “joke” bet for the class.

“If LSU beats Alabama this weekend, this half of the class gets an A, this class gets a B”. I was on the B side and gladly took it. The only good thing Jordan Jefferson ever did for me.
Posted by BayouBengals21
Member since Mar 2020
192 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 6:11 am to
So the company wanting to capture the carbon and the carbon sequestration well, held a public hearing this week. This is required to get their class 5 permit.

A few things that came out this meeting..

1.) The company only needs 75% of suggested acreage signed by the landowner to be able to move forward. Not 75% of the landowners but 75% of the acreage. Of the acreage requested roughly 80% is owned by a timber company that has already signed. So they can proceed with or without the rest of the landowners.

2.) Local municipalities have no authority. The federal government and state government hold all the power.

3.) sounds like all this 100% subsidized by the government with our tax dollars.

Crazy times!
Posted by jp4lsu
Member since Sep 2016
6346 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 7:17 am to
I would think the land owners would have a say if they own mineral right and water rights. Studies and evidence of impacts to aquifers need to be provided I would think.

Carbon Capture is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. Waste of money, boondoggle, money grab based on the environmentalist screams.
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
57979 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 7:48 am to
quote:

To make matters worse, the citizens have no say so. Even the land owners who will be having this put underneath them. The government is considering this imminent domain.


In the parish I grew up in, they are pushing this fiasco by claiming it's going to create something like 1k jobs (implying that those will go to the locals). The last I heard (and it's been a while), no one was pushing eminent domain (but the rhetoric likely changes based on who is pushing it).

While these funds may be coming from the feds, these aren't federal projects (to the best of my knowledge). Eminent domain is for government projects for the public good and (ostensibly) for public use (frick you, Kelo) which have to go in a certain area (a roadway, a park, a post office, etc) with little options otherwise. This carbon capture bullshite has LOTS of geographic options.



Since there are no federal laws governing the use of eminent domain for carbon capture, that authority is going to fall onto the states. Enter the fricktardary of outgoing state senator Sharon Hewitt:

quote:

§1108. Eminent domain, expropriation

A.(1) Any storage operator is hereby authorized, after obtaining any permit and any certificate of public convenience and necessity from the commissioner required by this Chapter, to exercise the power of eminent domain and expropriate needed property to acquire surface and subsurface rights and property interests necessary or useful for the purpose of constructing, operating, or modifying a storage facility and the necessary infrastructure including the laying, maintaining, and operating of pipelines for the transportation of carbon dioxide to a storage facility, together with utility, telegraph, and telephone lines necessary and incidental to the operation of these storage facilities and pipelines, over private property thus expropriated; and have the further right to construct and develop storage facilities and the necessary infrastructure, including the laying, maintaining, and operating of pipelines along, across, over, and under any navigable stream or public highway, street, bridge, or other public place; and also have the authority, under the right of expropriation herein conferred, to cross railroads, street railways, and other pipelines, by expropriating property necessary for the crossing under the general expropriation laws of this state. The right to run along, across, over, or under any public road, bridge, or highway, as before provided for, may be exercised only upon condition that the traffic thereon is not interfered with, and that such road or highway is promptly restored to its former condition of usefulness, at the expense of the storage facility and the pipeline owner if different from the storage operator, the restoration to be subject also to the supervision and approval of the proper local authorities.

B. The exercise of the right of eminent domain granted in this Chapter shall not prevent persons having the right to do so from drilling through the storage facility in such manner as shall comply with the rules of the commissioner issued for the purpose of protecting the storage facility against pollution or invasion and against the escape or migration of carbon dioxide. Furthermore, the right of eminent domain set out in this Section shall not prejudice the rights of the owners of the lands, or minerals, not acquired for the storage facility and not reasonably necessary for the use of the acquired property.


Short version: any company working on this can get authority to claim eminent domain at a nod from the state's DEQ.
Posted by Clyde Tipton
Planet Earth
Member since Dec 2007
40594 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 8:16 am to
quote:

Apparently they’re going to “capture carbon and send it to a well 10,000 feet deep”. Problem with that is, this well will be right below our aquifer.


Your aquifer is no where near 10,000' deep.

Still, carbon capture is a ruse.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
138911 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 8:23 am to
quote:

3.) sounds like all this 100% subsidized by the government with our tax dollars.



It is.
Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
21422 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 8:57 am to
carbon capture could be detrimental to life on this planet. We need CO2 in the atmosphere to survive.
Posted by Herschal
Land of the Free
Member since Sep 2011
2122 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 10:13 am to
quote:

I would think the land owners would have a say if they own mineral right and water rights


Strangely enough, in most states, the surface owner owns the pore space, not the mineral owner.
Posted by Hooligan's Ghost
Member since Jul 2013
5673 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 10:33 am to
good for belching
Posted by back9Tiger
Island Coconut Salesman
Member since Nov 2005
17645 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 10:36 am to
It's a solution looking for a problem under the IRA aka the Green New Deal.

I don't know the science but don't see how you keep all the pent up CO2 from not leaching out of the earth once you put it in there. Seems like all we are going to do is add to the CO2 in the atmosphere by constanting leaking CO2 out of these reserves.
Posted by elmo 57
Member since Sep 2023
130 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 10:42 am to
If this is in Allen parish American Press had a big article on it and KPLC was also there.Police Jury was questioned on why they let this happen. The response of the board was they didn't do it the state rep. did and he was a no show at the meeting
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
138911 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 12:40 pm to
Just an FYI PHMSA just released its long awaited new rule making to DOT 195 as it pertains to CO2 pipelines. Link is here: LINK

Just want to point this out however...CO2 pipeline operators will be required to provide local emergency response (your fire department) with training and equipment to respond to a CO2 release. What does mean? IMO that means CO2 pipeline operators will have to provide your local fire department with sufficient self contained breathing apparatus' and electric vehicles to provide transportation in and out of accidental CO2 plumes. Regular combustion engines do not work in CO2 plumes.


Posted by Thecoz
Member since Dec 2018
3878 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 1:17 pm to
“Strangely enough, in most states, the surface owner owns the pore space, not the mineral owner.”

In most states mineral rights and surface rights have been separated.. ie you sell your land but keep your mineral rights.. in Louisiana the go back together if no production i the area for X years ( I think 7)…..

Surface owners as you said own pore space (actually sediment grains creating them).


So injection for disposal of waste water etc is a deal between the surface owner and companies wanting to inject something down there..

The landowner usually get a dollar amount from “rent” of their surface land for use in operations and X dollars per barrel of water disposed ..

And yes the disposal zone should be no where near you fresh water aquifer.. but things leak and disposal stuff find its own path sometimes.
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
27618 posts
Posted on 1/16/25 at 1:23 pm to
quote:

And we have been dealing with CO2 pipelines and CO2 injection for many decades. It’s not new; it’s just that before we were doing it to recover hydrcarbons and now. It’s to store the CO2.


Bingo.

Sure, I’d say landowners contemplating agreeing to some sort of sequestration lease under their property (leasing their pore space) should do their best to vet the party who would operate under the lease. I’m sure there’s a bunch of shady entities that have formed to try to take advantage of this “free” government cheese.

However, there are companies with decades of experience and a track record of safely handling CO2, like Exxon, Oxy, Total, Kinder Morgan, who are also getting into the sequestration business.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram