A highly-publicized seminar held Wednesday at The Chewonki Foundation was praised by leaders in Maine’s conservation and legislative community as a critical and much needed opportunity to explain the subject of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a little-known technology that –very soon -- is sure to become a well-known concept in the U.S. and around the world.

The Chewonki Foundation organized Wednesday’s seminar as a way to advance the regional debate about climate change and also to improve the state’s understanding of CCS, an emerging technology that shows great promise for slowing the disastrous effects of global warming by permanently storing carbon dioxide deep underground.

“We are very pleased with the level of discourse at Wednesday's seminar,” said Chewonki President Don Hudson. “While we certainly went into the day with an open mind about carbon storage opportunities in Maine, presentations from leading thinkers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University, and U.S. Department of Energy all clearly reveal that Maine, and even the northeast, is not a likely home for this type of technology.” Hudson had high praise for the day’s speakers, saying that the seminar advanced a deepened understanding of the urgent global need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions.

Also at issue was the recently proposed $1.5 billion coal gasification plant in Wiscasset, which claims it will make use of CCS technology. Twin River, the company proposing the plant, presented a carbon life cycle study of their project, which has yet to undergo peer review. The company asserts that they can overcome obstacles presented by the day’s leading scientists. If approved, the plant would instantly become Maine's largest source of carbon dioxide; CO2 pollution is the single greatest cause of climate change.

“After hearing about the transportation and grave environmental implications of this project – not to mention the fact that we can’t even sequester carbon here in Maine, it seems pretty obvious that this plant is not a good match for Wiscasset,” said Bart Chapin, an Arrowsic resident and also a member of Chewonki’s Board of Trustees.

The Chewonki staff has urged its board to oppose the proposed plant based on the direct conflict with its environmental mission. “Our mission is protection of the natural world,” said Hudson, “Our staff is deeply committed to that mission, and because there is no plan in place for this development to capture 90 percent of the 4.7 million metric tons of carbon that it will emit annually, it simply does not put us on the path to addressing climate change.”

Several members of Chewonki’s board of trustees were present for the seminar, and an ad-hoc committee of the board has made a recommendation to oppose the Twin River project based on the speakers’ findings. A full board vote is expected within days. Additional attendees included officials from federal and state government, representatives from Maine’s environmental community, as well as elected officials and residents of the Town of Wiscasset, who will vote on the matter at the November 6 election.

Representatives from the Conservation Law Foundation heralded the event as critical for increasing the state’s awareness of a serious issue. “This was one of the highest quality science-based forums I have ever attended in Maine,” said Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) Vice President Sean Mahoney. “The people of Wiscasset heard loud and clear that while full carbon capture and sequestration are key components of national and global efforts to address climate change, Maine is just not ready and may never be the appropriate place for this technology.”

“This is a fatal flaw in the Twin River proposal,” said Mahoney. "First, in the best-case scenario, the proposed Twin River energy plant would only capture 25 percent of its carbon emissions. Yet, leading scientists of the day agreed that the necessary target is closer to 90 percent. Second, they have no ability to sequester the CO2. Here in Maine, it would be catch and release, which makes no environmental or economic sense.”

Panelists at the Chewonki seminar also stated that in order to be economically viable, energy plants making use of CCS must co-locate with known geologic storage formations. While plentiful opportunities for CCS exist in the Mid-Western coal states, no such formations are known to exist in Maine, and there is no current plan to conduct a feasibility study.

“Maine can make some significant contributions in the fight against global warming, including continued leadership on the regional greenhouse gas initiative, support of wind, hydro and even tidal power,” said Mahoney. “But burning coal is just not a good idea for Maine’s natural environment or its people.”

Joe Chaisson, of the Clean Air Task Force, a nonprofit environmental organization that addresses atmospheric pollution and climate change, noted that China is currently adding more than one new 1000MW pulverized coal power plant per week. Chaisson’s organization is focused on China and India’s rapid energy expansion. “Coal must be addressed because it represents 35 percent of current world’s CO2 emissions,” he said, “and it will dominate the projected growth of emissions.”