US energy secretary backs expensive, coal-consuming alleged weather improvement process

China carbon capture costs worth paying: U.S. energy sec | Green Business | Reuters

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is seen by many as the only way forward in a country still heavily dependent on burning coal to meet its energy needs, but scientists say it will actually require more energy consumption, not less.

But this "energy penalty" -- which includes the power required to drive the CCS facilities as well as transport and store the captured carbon -- is nothing compared to the environmental costs of doing nothing to curb emissions, or "business as usual," Chu told Reuters.

"Is 10 or 20 percent too big an energy penalty? Not really, considering the real costs (of current practices) are actually considerably higher."

He said even if the energy penalty amounted to 30 percent, it was still modest compared to the costs of spewing out not just CO2, but also nitrous oxide and sulphur dioxide, which cause acid rain and damage air, water and forests.
...
According to studies from the International Energy Agency, each carbon capture facility is likely to cost "a billion euros," and will need strong government backing to succeed.

Talking Points Against Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS)

CCS is an energy intensive process. For a coal fired power plant to capture and sequester all of it’s CO2, it would require up to 40% of the plants energy output.