Deep Trouble

The report argues that offshore carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an ineffective and risky strategy that prolongs fossil fuel dependence. It highlights that proposed 'hubs' in the Gulf of Mexico and North Sea face significant technical challenges, such as pressure management and leakage from legacy wells, while relying heavily on public subsidies. The document concludes that CCS often covers for expanded fossil fuel production and calls for a halt to these projects to protect marine ecosystems and accelerate a just energy transition.

• There is a significant increase in the scale of offshore CCS, with over fifty new projects announced as of mid-2023. If implemented, these would increase annual sub-seabed CO2 injection by 200-fold to approximately 450 million metric tonnes, though this represents only about 1.5 percent of annual global CO2 emissions.
• The concept of 'CCS hubs'—pooling CO2 from multiple industrial sources—is untested and introduces technical risks. Impurities in different CO2 streams, such as hydrogen sulfide or sulfur oxides, can cause pipeline corrosion and increase the toxicity of potential blowouts.
• Historical data from Norway's Sleipner and Snøhvit projects demonstrate that sub-seabed CO2 behavior is unpredictable. At Sleipner, CO2 migrated upward from its intended point, and Snøhvit had significantly less storage capacity than expected, requiring an unplanned investment of approximately USD 225 million.
• Offshore CCS projects are frequently used to justify the expansion of fossil fuel production. Over a dozen schemes are linked to new projects, including fossil-based hydrogen production and new gas drilling, such as the Barossa project in Australia.
• The highest risk of CO2 leakage comes from interaction with legacy oil and gas wells, yet projects are concentrated in heavily drilled areas like the US Gulf of Mexico and the European North Sea. More than half of proposed projects intend to use depleted wells for storage.
• Sub-seabed injection poses severe risks to marine environments, including ocean acidification and the displacement of toxic brines. Brine leaks can cause a ten-fold increase in local salinity, creating osmotic shock for benthic organisms like coral.
• Offshore CCS is prohibitively expensive and depends on massive public subsidies. Examples include the UK's announced funding of GBP 21 billion and Norway's funding of two-thirds of the Longship project (approximately USD 1.57 billion).
• There are critical regulatory and knowledge gaps regarding CO2 purity and long-term liability. In the US, there are no federal pipeline safety standards for CO2 composition, and liability for leaks often shifts to the state after a set period (e.g., 50 years in Louisiana).

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2024). Deep Trouble. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Deep-Trouble-The-Risks-of-Offshore-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. Deep Trouble. 2024. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Deep-Trouble-The-Risks-of-Offshore-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Deep Trouble |date=July 2024 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Deep-Trouble-The-Risks-of-Offshore-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2024deep, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Deep Trouble}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2024}, month = jul, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Deep-Trouble-The-Risks-of-Offshore-Carbon-Capture-and-Storage.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }