Advanced Search
DSpace@MIT

An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage

Research and Teaching Output of the MIT Community

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Herzog, Howard J. en_US
dc.contributor.author Caldeira, Ken. en_US
dc.contributor.author Reilly, John M. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2003-10-24T14:57:52Z
dc.date.available 2003-10-24T14:57:52Z
dc.date.issued 2002-12 en_US
dc.identifier.other no. 92 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://mit.edu/globalchange/www/abstracts.html#a92 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/3639
dc.description Abstract in HTML and technical report in PDF available on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://mit.edu/globalchange/www/). en_US
dc.description.abstract In this paper, we present a method to quantify the effectiveness of carbon mitigation options taking into account the "permanence" of the emissions reduction. While the issue of permanence is most commonly associated with a "leaky" carbon sequestration reservoir, we argue that this is an issue that applies to just about all carbon mitigation options. The appropriate formulation of this problem is to ask 'what is the value of temporary storage?' Valuing temporary storage can be represented as a familiar economic problem, with explicitly stated assumptions about carbon prices and the discount rate. To illustrate the methodology, we calculate the sequestration effectiveness for injecting CO2 at various depths in the ocean. Analysis is performed for three limiting carbon price assumptions: constant carbon prices (assumes constant marginal damages), carbon prices rise at the discount rate (assumes efficient allocation of a cumulative emissions cap without a backstop technology), and carbon prices first rise at the discount rate but become constant after a given time (assumes introduction of a backstop technology). Our results show that the value of relatively deep ocean carbon sequestration can be nearly equivalent to permanent sequestration if marginal damages (i.e., carbon prices) remain constant or if there is a backstop technology that caps the abatement cost in the not too distant future. On the other hand, if climate damages are such as to require a fixed cumulative emissions limit and there is no backstop, then a storage option with even very slow leakage has limited value relative to a permanent storage option. en_US
dc.format.extent 15 p. en_US
dc.format.extent 345158 bytes
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries Report no. 92 en_US
dc.title An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage en_US


Files in this item

Name Size Format Description
MITJPSPGC_Rpt92.pdf 337.0Kb PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

MIT-Mirage