On April 3rd 2024, a carbon dioxide pipeline ruptured at the Lake Charles Pump Station in southwest Louisiana. Over the next two hours, a plume of dense white vapour spread across the surrounding rural area. Local road blocks were put in place by emergency services, but thankfully no human casualties were reported. The release was relatively small at 300 tonnes, compared to a more serious 6,000 tonnes leak in Missouri in 2020, and windy conditions stopped the cloud falling to the ground. In areas with any human or animal habitation, large sudden releases are potentially fatal since heavier-than-air CO2 can drop like a stone, drive out oxygen and asphyxiate anyone beneath. One line of enquiry, common when such incidents occur, was that the rupture was caused by the formation of carbonic acid. This is a major problem in CO2 pipelines since the acid can form with trace amounts of water – as little as 100 parts per million. Just one further hazard to consider as the hard-Left Miliband lunatics press ahead with billion-pound plans to run hundreds of miles of near-surface, large-diameter pipes around the north of England to bury CO2 in quantities that will have no measurable effect on any change in the climate.
But of course that is not really the point. Around £22 billion is planned to be spent in the UK on the potentially dangerous attempt to capture CO2 and bury it in likely compromised former gas fields under the sea. Like equally useless wind power, the subsidy-spraying will ensure plenty of returns for state-coddled profiteers, while wealth-destroying, joke green jobs can be claimed to be created.
On Monday, the Daily Sceptic reported on plans to build a 120-mile pipeline from cement and lime works in Staffordshire to Morecombe Bay via Cheshire and the Wirral. The pipe, known as Peak Cluster, will run close to a number of towns and villages including Macclesfield, Ellesmere Port and Willaston. In the North-East, it is planned to run a near 60-mile Humber pipeline through a number of urban or semi-urban areas including Goole, Howden, Scunthorpe, Barton-upon-Humber, Brigg, Immingham, South Killingholme and Hedon. The pipe will cross the estuary and run close to Hull’s eastern and southern fringes and associated industrial zones.
Carbon capture is not a new technology and the Americans have a great deal of experience in running it since CO2 is often injected into wells to enhance the removal of oil and gas deposits. Moving CO2 around in large pipes needs handling with great care, and the overall safety record does not inspire complete confidence. According to the US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) database to 2021, corrosion, including both internal and external, arising from carbonic acid formation was one of the main causes of onshore CO2 incidents. Corrosion due to the carbonic acid accounted for a notable proportion of CO2 accidents, with material failure and weld issues being other leading causes.
In the oil and gas business, CO2 corrosion is known as ‘sweet corrosion’. Water at levels down to 50 parts per million is difficult to remove, particularly over a long pipe with numerous entry points. Over time, the dilute carbonic acid can lead to thinning of the pipe wall, pitting or severe local attack. Stainless steel is a safer material to use, but the cost is seen as prohibitive. Even controlling water within the pipe might not be enough since there could also be a problem with surface moisture entering micro cracks in defective or ageing welds.
Welds have been identified as a significant weak spot in CO2 pipeline construction. Data have shown corrosion pits clustering near welds when water is present. Welding along the Peak Cluster pipeline is likely to be done mostly on site in an open trench using common circumferential girth welds. In total, nearby residents need to hope that around 15,000 welds are made to the highest standards.
It is often noted that natural gas is transported in pipes to almost every home in the country, so why worry about moving CO2 around, particularly, as some claim, it will save the planet. But natural gas is a vital resource that creates wealth, powers a modern economy and stops the population from freezing in winter. Moving CO2 around does none of these things, and it does not save the planet. It is a monstrous exercise in virtue-signalling and, if plans for its expansion across northern England go ahead, it presents an unnecessary danger to local inhabitants for years to come. If you don’t believe your correspondent on this, try building a three-foot diameter CO2 pipe through Islington.
Saving the planet is a truly laughable claim. The Peak Cluster will remove 0.00008% of annual global CO2 emissions from what is described as the world’s largest cement decarbonisation initiative. If you think you can measure the effect this will have on global warming, there is probably a statistical post waiting for you in a British university specialising in Covid alarms and weather attribution guesses. Meanwhile, the finances behind carbon capture are pure Florida swampland territory. Assume that the Peak Cluster pipeline costs £500 million and allow a similar additional amount for its share of the £4 billion Morecombe Bay final processing and dumping site. Using these figures, consult Grok’s back-of-an envelope facility to calculate the annual cost of removing all global annual CO2. Ignore a trillion or so error either way, but it seem that following the UK’s lead in this world-beating green technology would cost around 14 times the GDP of the entire world.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.
The Lake Nyos disaster of 1986 where some 100-300,000 tonnes of CO2 gas was released from under the Cameroon lake, killed 1746 people and 3000 livestock. The cause of the release is unknown but is believed to be most likely due to a small volcanic eruption under the lake.
While this was orders of magnitude greater than could be released from a pipeline it does indicate the dangers of escaping CO2 in confined spaces or even in small depressions in the terrain where a pipeline may be installed. Leaving aside the idiocy of even attempting to collect CO2 gas from a cement plant and store it in deep wells, it is clear that such a project could have no significant effect on the magnitude of CO2 emissions which in itself is a totally useless indeed counter productive endeavour.
Your mention of the Lake Nyos disaster reminded me that this event prompted scientists to monitor CO2 levels in regions of known high volcanic activity, including Naples, Italy.. A popular tourist destination that millions choose for a vacation. Including CO2, apparently.
From google:
“CO2 seepage from Italian volcanoes like Vulcano Island can vary widely, with outdoor levels in some areas reaching over 5000 ppm in low-wind conditions due to soil degassing, especially near fumaroles, which can be hazardous. In other areas, such as the village of Vulcano Porto, outdoor concentrations may remain below 1000 ppm, although they can exceed health limits in confined spaces like basements. Nearby urban areas like Naples have also been shown to experience elevated CO2 levels from volcanic emissions, particularly at night.
Examples of CO2 seepage levels in Italy:
Vulcano Island: Near the crater, concentrations can reach 5000–7000 ppm during low wind. In the village, outdoor levels may rise by up to 200 ppm above normal, but stay below 1000 ppm, except in confined spaces like basements where the level can be exceeded.
Pantelleria Island: This island has a significant total CO2 output, with the main contribution coming from diffuse soil degassing. Specific ppm values for air concentrations were not provided, but the study noted the island is a site of active mantle degassing.
Naples: A study showed that volcanic CO2 plumes can contribute to air quality deterioration in Naples, with concentrations rising up to 2400 ppm above background levels at night in proximity to the sources.
CO2 levels in the Bay of Naples are a combination of volcanic and anthropogenic sources, with volcanic gas emissions from the Campi Flegrei caldera leading to highly variable concentrations. In the urban areas, levels often exceed the global average due to a combination of both sources, though volcanic emissions contribute significantly to elevated levels near the source. Studies show that volcanic emissions can increase CO2 to levels of several hundred parts per million in excess of background, and sometimes over 1000 ppm near active vents like the Solfatara crater under specific atmospheric conditions.
Volcanic CO2 emissions
Campi Flegrei: This volcanic area west of Naples is a significant source of natural CO2, with the Solfatara crater emitting 1067 tons per day according to one study.
Variability: The concentration of volcanic CO2 varies dramatically depending on the weather, especially prevailing winds.
Dispersal: On days with strong sea breezes, the plume can be carried inland toward the northwestern parts of Naples, increasing concentrations there.
Atmospheric conditions: Under stable atmospheric conditions and low winds, CO2 can build up to much higher levels in the populated areas around Solfatara.
Urban CO2 levels
Combined sources: Levels of CO2 in the urban area are a mix of volcanic emissions and anthropogenic sources, such as fossil fuel combustion.
Exceeding global average: Some studies have found that the average CO2 concentration over the Naples metropolitan area exceeds the global background value.
Monitoring: Due to the combination of sources and the presence of enclosed public spaces like schools, there is ongoing monitoring of CO2 levels to ensure public health and safety. The long-term exposure limit for CO2 in residential settings (i.e. in your home) at 1,000 ppm, averaged over a 24-hour period. However, it is normal for CO2 levels to fluctuate and serious health effects are not expected below 5,000 ppm.”
In answer to the question: “is the temperature profile of Naples, Italy unusual for that latitude?”
“No, Naples, Italy’s temperature profile is not unusual for its latitude; it is a typical example of a Mediterranean climate with hot, dry summers and mild, rainy winters. Its location between 30 and 45 deg North latitude is a common position for this type of climate, which is influenced by subtropical high pressure systems in the summer and the polar front in the winter. Mediterranean climate: Naples fits the classic description of a Mediterranean climate (Köppen classification: Csa).Seasonal variation: Summers are hot and dry, while winters are mild with more rainfall. Geographic context: This climate type is typical for western continental coasts in the 30-45 deg latitude band, including other parts of southern Italy, Spain, and California.”
Not what I would expect for a region with 6-7 times the background level if the ‘greenhouse’ theory is correct.
The main volcanoes near Naples, Italy, are Mount Vesuvius and the Phlegraean Fields (Campi Flegrei), both of which are active. Naples is also located near the island of Ischia, which has volcanic activity.
You have to remember that 423 ppm is for the entire air column, from the surface to space, while the measurements for the areas around these volcanoes only cover the first couple of meters of the atmosphere.
This “standard” is absolute fear mongering and is a joke. How many thousands of ppm CO2 are sub Mariners exposed to without any negative health effects again?
Sub vet .
We ran over 5,000 ppm for MONTHS .
And one time (due to scrubber failure ) we had over 15,000 ppm for days.
But following an abundance of caution, 1,000 ppm is a safe level with lots of margin. Just because some very special people (submariners) can survive higher concentrations is no reason to threaten the health and safety of the general public.
No. Nothing about ‘special people’ or lots of margin. Please read my reply above.
While submariners are very special people (my dad served), that does not make them any better prepared for CO2 related asphyxiation.
I agree there is no reason to threaten the health and safety of the general public, which is exactly what this nonsense does.
Off hand, I would say that if, say, 15,000 PPM CO2 atmospheric were a problem for the general public, the apparent fact that the submariners have nukes suggest a much bigger problem for the general public. Yet given that nuclear submariners went days immersed in 15,000 ppm CO2 and didn’t go berserk trigger-happy nuking of the world seems to further demonstrate the safety of moderately high levels of CO2.
The concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in exhaled breath is approximately 4% or around 40,000 parts per million (ppm). This is significantly higher than the 0.04% concentration found in the air we breathe in. Of course if we didn’t exhale within minutes, we’d surely die, but apparently from lack of O2. Just saying…
Thanks…and thanks for your service.
The same 1000 ppm is used for office buildings. It does not represent a dangerous level of CO2. It is the canary in the coal mine. The rationale is that that level of CO2 indicates very poor ventilation, and gases that may be toxic (from cleaners, carpets, sanitizers, pest control, etc) may be rising to harmful levels. If that were a harmful level of CO2, mouth-to-mouth respiration would be the kiss of death, not life.
Emissions from volcanoes generally include H2S. CO2 is going to be the least of your worries.
“this world-beating green technology would cost around 14 times the GDP of the entire world.”
A small price to pay for lining the pockets of the grifters !!!
Around £22 billion is planned to be spent
Really. On a useless and dangerous white elephant. They throw around billions here and billions there, and the decline is only accelerating. It can’t be hidden. As a rough rule of thumb, £1 billion of government expenditure is ~£35 per household, and so multiplying that by 22 means we’ll have to fork out ~£770 per household. But it gets worse:
In 2025-26, we expect public spending to amount to £1,370 billion, which is equivalent to around £48,000 per household – OBR UK
People out of work on £48k or more? I don’t think so. Major borrowing is required and even the bond markets have got the jitters.
Investors have warned that loosening the UK’s borrowing limits to fund more spending on defence would risk a bond market backlash and a self-defeating rise in borrowing costs – Financial Times
Put simply mad Ed is being more than profligate with money we do not have. He is equally unreceptive to any return to common sense and any notions of reversing the industrial decline. His green jobs will apparently save the day.
Why, given all that, would safety be a concern?
Wasn’t £22 bn the supposed “black hole” in the government’s budget which Labour used as the excuse for their swingeing tax increases after they won the general election?
Wouldn’t it have been better to fill the hole with the money being wasted on CCS?
In the first year they managed to increase that black hole, don’t you know…
The black hole in the public finances is set to require as much as £40bn in tax rises or spending cuts
No cuts have been made and national insurance is pricing people out of work. It’s a diminishing tax take.
The only people making money from the Labour government’s obsession with Net Zero are the Chinese who make all the hardware, the investors who are guaranteed a high return on their investment and the landowners who also get a guaranteed higher return in many cases than they could get by farming the land.
IIRC even the Crown estate get a rent for having the wind farms on the seabed.
Also the benefits classes and civil servant gold plated final salary pensions seem immune from any changes as the government seems scared stiff of it’s back benchers.
The only bit of good news is that Ed Milliband is none too popular in his constituency of Doncaster as he has just approved a 536 hectare solar farm against the wishes of his constituents. The only problem is that it’s 3 years to the next election.
The Crown, if I discovered gold, silver, oil, coal etc etc under my property would own it lock, stock and barrel.
The Crown is the front for Parliament. An elected dictatorship.
At 52.5 degrees North in the country ranked 229th out of 230 for solar potential by the World Bank where better to announce a new solar farm than Doncaster? Ed has to live up to his ‘Mad’ epithet
A few billion here and a few billion there and pretty soon we are talking about real money.
/s
I was born and raised in Illinois and recall the Late Senator Everett M. Dirksen saying: ” A billion here. A billion there. It all adds up!” The Senator’s other frequent quip was: “That is just so much hogwash”.
Mad Ed is spewing an awful large amounts of hogwash about greenhouse gases, global warming and climate change.
“A few billion here and a few billion there … “
Apparently Dirksen did say a few words to that effect, more or less. 😐
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Everett_Dirksen
Thanks for the info on the quote. I didn’t know about “few”.
Today, the quip would be “A few trillion here. A few trillion there. It all adds up”.
Since the US EPA has rescinded the Endangerment Finding of 2009 for CO2, will Mad Ed have an epiphany, repent, and repeal his climate agenda and abandon his goal of Net Zero by 2050?
When will the scientists of the UK prestigious universities and colleges come forth, hold a conference, and explain to the people that CO2 does not cause global warming and climate change?
When pigs fly.
If you want to sequester CO2, why not plant trees?
If you actually wish to fix Carbon in soil, it probably ends up being more complex than that. But really, largely passive plant based sequestration is probably cheaper and more effective than elaborate high tech schemes
Planting trees is always good. But, the climatistas, some of them, have latched on to a wacky theory called “proforestation”- which calls for essentially, no more forestry- so that the only purpose of forests is to sequester carbon. The leaders of that crazy movement are here in Wokeachusetts where I’ve been battling them for years. Yes, they want more trees- but don’t ever cut any- after all, they already own nice, large, wood homes loaded with nice, expensive wood furniture (often from the rain forests) and tons of paper products.
Paper products like tissues, toilet paper and paper towels. The city slickers haven’t got a clue about where this stuff comes from.
I live in BC and about 200 million trees are planted ever year in sections of the forest that have been logged and in areas wiped out by forest fires and the mountain pine beetle.
I’d rather sequester enviro-nutters. At least then we wouldn’t have to listen to their endless whining and fear mongering about essentially nothing.
I live about 200 yards from where the Peak Cluster pipline will run near Chester. Hope I’m not Doxxing myself here!
We just planted an acre or so of new trees for a green space. It’s got wildlife, an old natural pond full of goodness knows what creatures. There are ~5k trees in the wood.
They’re looking at destroying about 1600 of them to plant the pipeline plus access road. Because the pipe will be buried, we’ll not be able to replant trees over the top, so we’ll have lost 1/3 of our wild space, plus potentially part
There’s a concerted effort in the village to try and get the pipeline moved to the north about 100 yards, so it goes through farmland which has no trees.
I’m honestly not holding out much hope.
I live on the Wirral not far from where the compressor station is proposed to be built in Meols. I can only hope that the financial and political costs of the project will force them to abandon this madness.
They’ve already spent months sinking a conduit of sorts under the M53, plus a hydrogen pipeline under the M56.
I fear they’re going nowhere.
I think that they forgot to complete the name–Peak Cluster F**k
“Moving CO2 around in large pipes needs handling with great care….”
The problem with large pipes is that they have higher volume to surface area ratios than smaller ones. That means any carbonic acid formed has a smaller area to attack with increasing amounts of H2CO3.
Off Topic: The UK Green Party
No longer has anything to do with environmental concerns and all that sustainability stuff. It’s been quite a journey and to illustrate that, here are some of their current policies:
Illegal migrants would be given a free house and paid a wage with no requirement to work under the Green Party’s immigration policy.
Let arrivals use the NHS for free the moment they enter Britain.
And they will be allowed to work “with no restrictions” under plans for “a world without borders”. …
Last week, the party’s plans to legalise drugs including crack cocaine and heroin for recreational use were exposed. … – Daily Sceptic
Incidentally, the Green party now produces election videos in Urdu. In Manchester.
The prospect of these Islamo-green lunatics getting their hand on the levers of power in the UK is terrifying.
Coincidentally, the colour of the Islamic religion is green!
It’s pure sectarianism. The Green Party is endorsed by none other than “The Muslim Vote” organisation.
Yes, but think about the size of all those ladies boobies!
Meanwhile, the oceans sequester 2.8 billion tons of carbon annually by making limestone in warm shallow seas.
What’s that? You have a warm sea problem? Give NPR, the BBC, the Guardian, et. al. a few minutes to think and they’ll come up with a fix for that.
Of course there’s a problem, the oceans do this safely for free.
The oceans and fresh water lakes and ponds, and the trees and green plants are Mother Nature’s carbon capture and storage systems.
The microorganisms that have shells of CaCO3 are the cocolithophores and the foraminifores. They take in HCO3^1- and convert it CaCO3. When they die, the shell of CaCO3 sink to the ocean floor. After many millions of years beds of fine limestone are formed. All the surface limestone was once under the oceans.
Another difference between natural gas pipelines and CO2 pipelines is that natural gas is not corrosive and does not attack the pipe it is being transported in.
Someone with more technical knowledge can step in here, but a cursory search tells me that the pipe pressures involved are also quite different, from 60 to 200 psi for natural gas as compared to 900 to 2500 psi for CO₂. More pressure, combined with the corrosive potential, certainly increases risk.
Ouch. I did not know that. That is terrifying.
I thought the natural gas pipe explosion (VA) and the massive sewage pipe disaster (DC)) were bad.
“See? We TOLD you CO2 was dangerous!”
Ah, more worse-than-useless “green” crap that ironically, will make the Earth *LESS GREEN* should ironically succeed in unnecessarily “sequestering” “carbon (dioxide).”
If it leaks out and kills people, they’ll just see it as another benefit – you know, reduce that “surplus population” and all that Eco-Nazi Malthusian shit.
The Population Bomb.
“It is often noted that natural gas is transported in pipes”
Currently in Fairfax County, Virginia, one house exploded and dozens evacuated due to a gas pipe leak.
https://www.fox5dc.com/news/centreville-virginia-home-explosion-ntsb-investigation-natural-gas-leak
Perfection is unobtainium. People will die from CO2 pipe leaks without spectacular fireworks alerting the public of the crisis.
I think the 2020 leak was in Mississippi not Missouri. Carbon leak in Satartia prompts federal focus on pipeline safety | The Columbian-Progress
Does Mad Ed have a plan to supply the electricity for the CO2 pipeline pumps and the pumps for the injection of the CO2 into deep underground for storge?
Windmills.
LOL! We need to inform Mad Ed about the late John L. Daly’s website: “Still Waiting For Greenhouse” available at:
http://www.john-daly.com. He showed over 20 years ago that CO2 does not cause warming of air. Shown below is the homepage. Since I can post only one image per comment check out my next reply.
NB: If you click on the image, it will expand and become clear. Click on “X” in the circle to contract the image and return to Comments.
Show in the chart (See below) is plot of the annual mean temperature in Adelaide from 1857 to 1999. In 1857 the concentration of CO2 was 280 ppmv (0.55 g CO2/cu. m. of air) and by 1999 it had increased to 368 ppmv (0.72 g CO2/cu. m. of air), but there was no corresponding increase in this port city. The reason there was no increase in air temperature in the city is that there is too little CO2 to absorb out-going IR light to heat up the air. In 1999 the annual mean temperature (Tave) was 16.7° C.
To obtain recent Adelaide temperature data, I went to:
https://www.extremeweatherwatch/cities/adelaide/average-temperature-by-year. There is displayed from 1887 to 2025 the Tmax and Tmin data in a table. For 2025 the computed Tave was 17.4° C. The sight increase of Tave by 0.7°is well with in the range of the natural temperature variation in this city. In 2025 the concentration of CO2 was 426 ppmv (0.84 g CO2/cu. m. of air).
The above empirical data, calculations and the work of John Daly falsifies the claims by the IPCC that CO2 cause global warming and climate change.
NB: If you click on the chart it will expand and become clear. Click on the “X” in the circle to contract the chart and return to Comments.
Here is the chart for Adelaide. I accidently clicked on
“Post Comment” before attaching the chart to the Comment.
Here the chart for Adelaide. I’m a really bad day for posting charts.
Show in the chart is a plot of the annual mean temperatures in Adelaide from 1857 to 1999. In 1857 the concentration of CO2 in air was ca. 280 ppmv (0.55 g CO2/cu. m. of air) and by 1999 it had increased to ca. 368 ppmv (0.73 g CO2/cu. m. of air), but there was no corresponding increase in air temperature in this port city. The reason there was no increase in air temperature is that there is too little CO2 in the air to absorb enough out-going IR light.
What’s really behind this CO2 thing? Is it time to Follow The Money Trail? Somehow I believe that the people behind these CO2 pipelines are somehow benefiting greatly from 45Q. As long as CO2 is being generated and pumped through these pipelines, someone is getting rich.
Just saying it smells fishy. CO2 doesn’t smell does it?
Why stop there? Remove ALL CO2!
Kill everyone!<g>
I once started a syngas company in 1999 California, and learned a great deal about gas pipelines. The specifications for gas allowed to enter the U.S. natural gas pipeline system are quite stringent when it comes to both water and CO2 content. The latter is a big problem with natural gas, since the gas from wells contains a lot of CO2. It has to be stripped chemically using amine towers (in Uganda they use Idi Amin towers…ha ha) which use a fair amount of energy to run. Even so, pipeline corrosion does happen. The whole reason the syngas opportunity presented itself was that a natural gas pipeline in New Mexico ruptured. It was a high pressure pipeline, so the failure was explosive, and ruptured another natural gas pipeline next to it. Both were conveying gas from Louisiana and Texas to Southern California, where I lived. The delivery rate was constant, and during winter months when demand was low, the excess was pumped into depleted gas wells in California, then returned to the system to meet peak demand in summer. With the gas supply to Southern California severely reduced, we faced an energy crisis in the coming summer. As far as I know, the failure was due to long term corrosion from the extremely low levels of CO2 and H2O allowed by the gas specs. The problem would definitely be magnified in CO2 pipelines. I don’t think this article is alarmist, meaning exaggerating a threat to achieve unstated objectives. It’s pretty much dead on.