No geologic evidence that seismicity causes fault leakage that would render large-scale carbon capture and storage unsuccessful
In a recent Perspective (1), Zoback and Gorelick argued that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is likely not a viable strategy for reducing CO[subscript 2] emissions to the atmosphere. They argued that maps of earthquake epicenters portray earthquakes occurring almost everywhere, suggesting that Eart...
Main Authors: | Juanes, Ruben, Herzog, Howard J., Hager, Bradford H |
---|---|
Other Authors: | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering |
Format: | Article |
Language: | en_US |
Published: |
National Academy of Sciences (U.S.)
2013
|
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/80711 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7370-2332 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9078-8484 |
Similar Items
-
Coupled Modeling of Multiphase Flow and Fault Poromechanics During Geologic CO[subscript 2] Storage
by: Jha, Birendra, et al.
Published: (2016) -
The lifetime of carbon capture and storage as a climate-change mitigation technology
by: MacMinn, Christopher W., et al.
Published: (2013) -
Inferring Fault Frictional and Reservoir Hydraulic Properties From Injection‐Induced Seismicity
by: Jagalur‐Mohan, Jayanth, et al.
Published: (2022) -
Two sides of a fault: Grain-scale analysis of pore pressure control on fault slip
by: Yang, Zhibing, et al.
Published: (2018) -
Stakeholder attitudes on carbon capture and storage -- An international comparison
by: Johnsson, Filip, et al.
Published: (2015)