Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Deploying Carbon Capture and Storage in Europe and the United States: A Comparative Analysis

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law

Carbon capture and storage could play an important role as a near-term bridging technology, enabling deep reductions from greenhouse gas emissions while still allowing use of inexpensive fossil fuels. However, filling this technological promise requires resolution of key regulatory and legal uncertainties surrounding both human and ecological health, integration within a larger climate policy, and clear assignment of responsibility and liability for long-term care. Deployment of CCS projects in the European Union (E.U.) and the United States (U.S.) may be technologically similar, but will be contextually different. In this paper, we explore the existing energy, policy, regulatory and legal climates that will necessitate different approaches for deployment. The high U.S. dependence on coal makes CCS very important if the U.S. is to achieve deep emissions reductions, while in the E.U. an established climate policy, the importance of off shore projects, and a supportive political climate are favorable to CCS deployment. Additionally, in Europe, regulators must clarify the classification of CO2 within E.U. and international regulations governing on and offshore projects, whereas in the U.S. subsurface property rights, abandoned wells, and state-level jurisdictional difference will play important roles.

Affiliations: 1: University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs; 2: University of Minnesota Law School, University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs

10.1163/187601007X00280
/content/journals/10.1163/187601007x00280
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187601007x00280
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/187601007x00280
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187601007x00280
2007-01-01
2016-12-06

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation