Episode Summary
Executive Summary: Jason introduces MCJ membership and interviews Sarah Saltzer, who explains carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a three-step process—capture, transport, and geologic storage—and argues it is a critical near- and long-term climate tool. She emphasizes CCS’s technical readiness but notes it is limited by cost, incentives, and project scale, with oil and gas expertise, government policy, startups, and industrial hubs all needed to accelerate deployment.
Main Topics: MCJ Membership and Community Building (Priority: 2/5): Jason opens with the membership program, a Slack-based climate peer community that has grown substantially and generated startups, nonprofits, hiring, fundraising, events, and open-source projects. Sarah Saltzer’s Background and Stanford Center for Carbon Storage (Priority: 4/5): Sarah outlines her geology and oil-industry career at Chevron and how those skills translate to managing multidisciplinary CCS research at Stanford, including technical, economic, and policy analysis. How CCS Works (Priority: 5/5): Sarah explains CCS as capturing CO2 at emitters, compressing and transporting it via special pipelines, and injecting it into geologic formations for permanent storage or enhanced oil recovery. CCS Scale, Progress, and Readiness (Priority: 5/5): The discussion covers the maturity of CCS since the 1970s, current operating projects, and the gap between today’s deployment and what is needed to meet climate goals. Costs, Incentives, and Policy Support (Priority: 5/5): Sarah identifies capture costs as the main barrier and highlights policy tools like 45Q and California’s LCFS as mechanisms that can make projects economically viable. Role of Oil and Gas, Startups, and Government (Priority: 4/5): Sarah argues that oil majors, service companies, startups, and governments all have roles to play because of their technical capabilities, capital, and policy-setting power. Ethics, Energy Transition, and Career Advice (Priority: 4/5): The conversation addresses the moral tension around fossil fuels and climate, and Sarah encourages young people to follow their passions while recognizing oil and gas skills remain valuable in the transition.
Key Arguments: CCS is a practical climate tool for sectors that cannot decarbonize quickly, especially industry and power generation. The technology is not new; it has been used since the 1970s, so the main challenge is scaling, not invention. Current deployment is far too small relative to emissions, so thousands of projects will be needed by 2040. Capture costs are the main bottleneck; transport and storage are comparatively inexpensive. Government incentives such as 45Q and California’s LCFS can make otherwise uneconomic CCS projects viable. Oil and gas companies are uniquely positioned to help because they already have expertise in geology, drilling, pipelines, subsurface modeling, and operations. Future CCS growth will likely come from industrial clusters or hubs that share transport and storage infrastructure. CCS also supports net-zero and negative-emissions pathways such as BECCS and DAC, making it relevant beyond fossil fuels.
Data Points: MCJ membership size: more than 1,300 members - Jason describes the climate peer community built around the show. CCS projects operating globally: 21 projects - Sarah says these projects are currently up and running around the world. CCS projects operating in the U.S.: 10 projects - Of the 21 operating projects, 10 are in the United States. Annual global CO2 emissions: 32 billion tons per year - Sarah cites the scale of the climate problem CCS must address. CO2 stored by current CCS projects: 32 million tons per year - Current operating projects store far less than annual emissions. Additional projects in pipeline: about 60 projects - Sarah says many more are planned but not yet operating. Needed project count by 2040: a couple thousand projects - Sarah argues the current pipeline is still far too small to meet climate targets. Current CCS growth rate: about 10% per year - Sarah says deployment is growing but not fast enough. Desired CCS growth rate: 20% or more per year - She links this pace to meeting Paris-aligned climate goals. Ethanol capture cost: about $20/ton - Sarah gives ethanol as an easier, lower-cost capture example. Cement capture cost: about $50–60/ton - She cites cement as a mid-range capture-cost example. Combined cycle power plant capture cost: about $70–80/ton - She says power plants are harder and more expensive to capture from. Transportation cost: less than $10/ton - Pipeline transport is described as relatively cheap per ton of CO2. Storage cost: $5–10/ton - Geologic storage is presented as relatively low cost. 45Q tax credit for saline storage: $50/ton - A federal incentive for captured and stored CO2. 45Q tax credit for EOR: $35/ton - A lower credit applies when CO2 is used for enhanced oil recovery. California LCFS credit price: about $200/ton - Sarah notes the credit market can strongly support CCS economics. California net-zero electricity goal: 2045 - Jason and Sarah reference California’s climate target. Paris Accord temperature goal: 2 degrees C - Sarah links required CCS growth to Paris-aligned warming limits.
Pivotal Quotes: "Carbon storage is such an important topic" — Jason Jacobs: Jason frames the interview and explains why he wanted Sarah on the show. "Our problem is a 37 billion ton problem and we're storing 32 million." — Sarah Saltzer: Sarah contrasts the scale of emissions with the current CCS footprint. "I think that the oil companies are essential in helping us figure out how to move forward in the energy transition." — Sarah Saltzer: Sarah argues oil and gas expertise remains central to CCS and the broader transition.
Implications: CCS is technically viable but underbuilt; scaling will depend on policy, cheaper capture tech, and shared infrastructure. Oil and gas skills may remain highly relevant, while investors and policymakers should focus on hub-based projects and incentives that unlock deployment.