The long-term stewardship of carbon dioxide storage sites - who pays, for what and how?

摘要

The issue of who should bear liability for the long-term stewardship of closed CO_2 storage sites requires a careful balancing exercise between the interests of storage site operators, government, regulators, taxpayers and the environment. Whatever the moral, political and environmental arguments for and against it, CCS does remain one of the more promising mitigation measures inrnthe fight against climate change. However, it should not be deployed without adequate legal safeguards being put in place to provide remedies in the event of CCS activities giving rise to environmental damage. That said, decisions need to be made about the types of environmental damage that the law should provide relief for. The common law already provides remedies for local damage to health and property (although somewhat unpredictably and unreliably). The EU has legislated in the form of the Environmental Liability Directive to provide for a regime for the remediation of local environmental damage, and in the UK statute may cover certain types of damage to the unowned environment. Finally, the extension of the EU ETS to CO_2 storage sites should provide a mechanism for addressing the issue of leakages from closed CO_2 storage sites.rnAlthough the law may now be extending itself to regulate the long-term storage of CO_2, the real issue is who should bear the liability for the long-term stewardship of closed CO_2 storage sites. The 'polluter pays' principle is not easily applied to an activity which is meant to last indefinitely, so state liability as proposed by the European Commission would appear to be the most pragmatic solution. Whether future generations should pay for the remediation of current generations' activities is a complex moral question, but the creation of a strict regulatory regime which ensures that CO_2 storage sites are properly selected, closed and decommissioned, backed up by ring-fenced funds providing a financial resource to cover the cost of any subsequent remediation minimises the risk of inter-generational inequity.