Vice President, Corporate Controller & Interim Principal Accounting Officer, Cerence
Search every verified Katherine Roman interview, podcast appearance, and on-the-record quote — each transcript cross-checked by AI and human review to confirm speaker identity. In a September 2023 presentation, Dr. Katherine Romanak discussed the pros and cons of carbon capture and storage (CCS). She described CCS as "waste disposal" that is currently "very expensive" and not economic without incentives, noting that enhanced oil recovery has made early demonstration projects profitable. Romanak stated that "achieving zero goals is virtually impossible without CCS" and that it is necessary to stop emissions from fossil fuels during the transition away from them. She also said that the pace of CCS development has increased due to tax incentives like the 45Q credit, and that Texas moving toward primacy for permitting CCS projects is "a great idea" to speed up deployment. Romanak highlighted several challenges, including the need for 80,000 new kilometers of CO2 pipelines and a "large energy penalty" from CCS that can increase other pollution, though she noted costs are coming down with each deployment. She advocated for a price on carbon and a "carbon take back obligation" for industries, and emphasized that involving fossil fuel companies in the conversation is essential because they are funding CCS development.
“Achieving that zero goals is virtually impossible without CCS; we're going to need it. It supports the integration of Renewables and helps ensure power availability when Renewables are not at full capacity.”
“CO2 storage is waste disposal; there's nothing economic about it. It's something you have to pay for, so for the early stages, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) has made it profitable to start demonstration projects.”
“We need policy to be implemented so that, just like with sulfur dioxide, we have a price on carbon. There's also the carbon take back obligation, which requires industries to eliminate the emissions they produce before continuing operations.”
“The cost of CCS is very expensive right now; it's a large-scale process. However, with each deployment, costs are coming down, similar to how solar power costs have dramatically decreased over decades.”
“The pace of CCS development has increased massively in the past couple of years, largely due to tax incentives like the 45Q tax credit, which is driving momentum globally.”
“Texas is moving towards primacy for permitting CCS projects, which is a great idea. Currently, EPA permitting can take two to four years, so local regulatory control is needed to speed up deployment.”
“There is a large energy penalty for CCS, mostly in the compression phase, meaning coal power plants would have to burn more coal and produce more NOx pollution. However, this is improving over time.”
“Most companies are targeting saline reservoirs for CO2 storage because the 45Q tax credit is higher for saline storage than for enhanced oil recovery reservoirs, despite the latter having more known subsurface data.”
“We need to keep up the pressure on fossil fuel manufacturers for divestment and transition away from fossil fuels, but this won't happen overnight. Meanwhile, CCS is necessary to stop emissions from fossil fuels during the transition.”
“Involving everyone in the conversation is essential, including fossil fuel companies and emitters, because they are paying for CCS development. Excluding them would hinder solving the problem.”
Do you wonder whether CCS is a game-changing solution or simply a distraction by emitters to continue business as usual?
Sign in to search the full transcript archive, filter by topic, and access every quote from Katherine Roman.
The summary and quote tags on this profile are produced with AI assistance from verified, first-person interview transcripts, then checked by our team to confirm the speaker's identity and the accuracy of every quote. See how we verify →