On paper, carbon capture and storage (CCS) sounds like a miracle. The reality looks less like innovation and more like an industry cash grab.

Stanford Professor Mark Jacobsen discusses why CCS and DAC are not needed.

The Roundtable signed onto a letter opposing a proposal to fast-track pipelines, including carbon pipelines, and other fossil fuel infrastructure.

To mislead with a complex model, an expert must simply fail to fully disclose the model settings and data that they fed the model. Experts need not voice a lie; they only need to avoid making their work freely and fully reproducible by someone else.

Carbon capture and storage proponents are using a new report to argue we must dramatically scale this technology to remove climate-warming pollution and decarbonize the steel and cement industries. The canard of the hard-to-decarbonize industry has captured many well-meaning climate advocates in the CCS trap.

In reality, CCS is only consistently profitable when CCS is coupled with natural gas processing facilities to increase oil recovery from existing petroleum reservoirs.

A deep dive on carbon capture, and the costs and risk associated with the technology.

To maximize transparency and accountability, we need more answers about carbon capture projects.