6 ms·

Norway have been doing CC since 1996 from natural gas and pumping the CO2 back into the well. The first commercial reservoir (Northern light project) for pumpin

Norway have been doing CC since 1996 from natural gas and pumping the CO2 back into the well. The first commercial reservoir (Northern light project) for pumping CO2 back into old oil wells will open in 2024. The drilling is finished and the capacity is estimated to 1.5 million tonnes of CO2 per year for this first project. There is not any capacity left now for new contracts, but they are planning for additional wells. https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/environment-and-technology/carbon-capture-and-storage/ https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/environment-and-technology/...

nosianu 5y ago
It would be far more efficient (since additional energy is used for all the actions around it all) to not bring up carbon from below ground in the first place. As long as Norway brings up new oil those actions are just marketing. See the article we are talking about here. First you spend energy to bring up carbon. Then you spend more energy to get it back down again. The math does not check out. Not bringing up the carbon in the first place would have been far more beneficial for atmospheric CO2 levels. Worse, they plan to do more of the oil-digging: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-oil-environment-idUSKBN28W104 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-oil-environment-id... (this is dated Dec 2020) "Norway wants to lead on climate change. But first it must face its legacy of oil and gas." -- "An expert explains Norway’s climate change paradox." -- https://www.vox.com/22227063/norway-oil-gas-climate-change https://www.vox.com/22227063/norway-oil-gas-climate-change
- p1mrx 5y ago
  It might be possible to pull hydrogen from the ground, leaving the carbon in place. https://proton.energy/ https://proton.energy/ claims to be trying.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- magicalhippo 5y ago
  As a Norwegian I agree we should phase out oil sooner. Like you say, not releasing the CO2 to begin with is the best option. However Norway is not the sole oil producer. If demand is not reduced and other producers compensate for our reduction, then that won't really help the planet at all. As such it seems reducing demand would be the best way. Not that easy to achieve on a global scale though, it would seem.
  - justatdotin 5y ago
    yes, that's what we all say
    - mavhc 5y ago
      "He started it Miss, it's not my fault!"
  - KSteffensen 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
  - tarjei 5y ago
    Every Norwegian needs this illusion(Or livsløgn as Ibsen would have said) to sustain the idea of belonging to a nation that is up to something good. Reality is that Norway is increasingly subsidizing it's oil industry in a way that is not sustainable - especially not economically. Instead of investing in the future Norway is investing in old dying industries - our Corona package contains almost no investments in sustainable technologies even thought the economy is heading for a hard shock the next time the oil price takes a dive. Reducing demand and reducing supply both help in getting the CO2 emissions down. A good start would be to just stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry.
    - magicalhippo 5y ago
      I feel confident that if Norway stops pumping oil tomorrow, it would be pretty devastating to our economy. I also feel confident that other countries would increase production in response. Is that just an illusion? I absolutely agree that we should focus a lot more on making new jobs that aren't oil-related, and stop investing in oil like we do. Oil is most definitely not the future, and we should push hard to make a transition starting yesterday. That's not at odds with what I wrote above though. Reducing climate change is a global game of prisoners dilemma.
- hef19898 5y ago
  We need both, less CO2 extracted from fossil fuels and active capture of the CO2 already released.
- rasputnik6502 5y ago
  I was always wondering what is the logic behind that - pump oil from underneath the sea, sell it and buy stock or bonds with the money. Basically trading valuable resources for some paper that may be worth nothing in future.

nosianu 5y ago

It would be far more efficient (since additional energy is used for all the actions around it all) to not bring up carbon from below ground in the first place. As long as Norway brings up new oil those actions are just marketing. See the article we are talking about here. First you spend energy to bring up carbon. Then you spend more energy to get it back down again. The math does not check out. Not bringing up the carbon in the first place would have been far more beneficial for atmospheric CO2 levels. Worse, they plan to do more of the oil-digging: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-oil-environment-idUSKBN28W104 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-oil-environment-id... (this is dated Dec 2020) "Norway wants to lead on climate change. But first it must face its legacy of oil and gas." -- "An expert explains Norway’s climate change paradox." -- https://www.vox.com/22227063/norway-oil-gas-climate-change https://www.vox.com/22227063/norway-oil-gas-climate-change

p1mrx 5y ago
It might be possible to pull hydrogen from the ground, leaving the carbon in place. https://proton.energy/ https://proton.energy/ claims to be trying.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
magicalhippo 5y ago
As a Norwegian I agree we should phase out oil sooner. Like you say, not releasing the CO2 to begin with is the best option. However Norway is not the sole oil producer. If demand is not reduced and other producers compensate for our reduction, then that won't really help the planet at all. As such it seems reducing demand would be the best way. Not that easy to achieve on a global scale though, it would seem.
- justatdotin 5y ago
  yes, that's what we all say
  - mavhc 5y ago
    "He started it Miss, it's not my fault!"
- KSteffensen 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
- tarjei 5y ago
  Every Norwegian needs this illusion(Or livsløgn as Ibsen would have said) to sustain the idea of belonging to a nation that is up to something good. Reality is that Norway is increasingly subsidizing it's oil industry in a way that is not sustainable - especially not economically. Instead of investing in the future Norway is investing in old dying industries - our Corona package contains almost no investments in sustainable technologies even thought the economy is heading for a hard shock the next time the oil price takes a dive. Reducing demand and reducing supply both help in getting the CO2 emissions down. A good start would be to just stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry.
  - magicalhippo 5y ago
    I feel confident that if Norway stops pumping oil tomorrow, it would be pretty devastating to our economy. I also feel confident that other countries would increase production in response. Is that just an illusion? I absolutely agree that we should focus a lot more on making new jobs that aren't oil-related, and stop investing in oil like we do. Oil is most definitely not the future, and we should push hard to make a transition starting yesterday. That's not at odds with what I wrote above though. Reducing climate change is a global game of prisoners dilemma.
hef19898 5y ago
We need both, less CO2 extracted from fossil fuels and active capture of the CO2 already released.
rasputnik6502 5y ago
I was always wondering what is the logic behind that - pump oil from underneath the sea, sell it and buy stock or bonds with the money. Basically trading valuable resources for some paper that may be worth nothing in future.