The upstream emissions for fracked gas are every bit as important as the direct CO2 emissions.

The real benefit of CCS occurs when it is coupled with biofuels. Biomass Energy CCS would require a significant carbon tax or regulatory requirement to be economically feasible, but is increasingly viewed as essential if the world is to avoid the 2 C temperature increases that the IPCC view as dangerous.

In fact, the technical modelling for the Paris Climate Agreement shows that the world must rely heavily on the “negative emissions” from biomass energy CCS in order to reduce atmospheric levels of CO2. Unfortunately, that is a technology that the world simply is not adopting fast enough.

Jim Kotcon, Monongalia County, WV

Putting carbon capture and sequestration equipment on the proposed gas-fired power plant would not solve its climate-abuse problem. Much of the impact of gas-fired electricity generation is in the methane leaks all along the supply chain.

The reason you see such varying numbers on the climate intensity of methane as compared to carbon dioxide is that there is a time question: while methane is something like 108 times more potent, it doesn’t last in the atmosphere nearly as long. Thus the comparison becomes a matter of judgement.

Surely if there are still humans in 100 years, they will care that CO2 emitted now–or 100 years ago–is still up there warming the Earth, while the methane is long gone. But on the other hand, the time when we are risking pushing the climate system over the brink into a dangerously unstable equilibrium, because various positive feedback mechanisms take over, is NOW.

So the short-term impact of methane may matter more than the long term impact of CO2. The only responsible approach to a gas-fired power plant in Mon County is not to do it. If they still want to put in a solar facility — if that isn’t just a sweetener to ram in the gas-fired power plant — fine, go ahead.

Mary Wildfire, Roane County, WV