The Adobe Flash Player is required to view this multimedia interactive. Get it here.

700 protest against carbon dioxide plan

Project includes pushing CO2 from a nearby ethanol plant deep underground in Greenville.

Hundreds of Darke County area residents attend a Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration meeting on Monday, June 29, at the Lighthouse Christian Center in Greenville.

Staff photo by Chris Stewart Hundreds of Darke County area residents attend a Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration meeting on Monday, June 29, at the Lighthouse Christian Center in Greenville.

ENLARGE PHOTO

Photos: Hundreds protest plant's plan

Victim identified in fatal shooting outside restaurant
11:31 a.m.
H1N1 flu suspected in Preble County officer’s death, sheriff says
11:18 a.m.
Coroner confirms identities of three men killed in arson
11/7/09
Former Mead Data Central leader dies
11/7/09
Children to learn about aviators from Miami County organizations
11/7/09
> More headlines

By Ben Sutherly, Staff Writer Updated 12:56 AM Tuesday, June 30, 2009

GREENVILLE — At least 700 people turned out Monday, June 29, for a meeting organized by opponents of a $92.8 million plan to inject carbon dioxide from a nearby ethanol plant more than 3,000 feet underground.

“Are we making a statement?” Anne Vehre of Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration asked the standing-room-only crowd at Lighthouse Christian Center, Sebring-Warner Road and U.S. 36.

“Yes,” many shouted.

“Do we want it?” Vehre said.

“No,” they replied.

“We don’t want to become the dumping ground for carbon dioxide,” Vehre, former Darke County Solid Waste District director, said prior to the meeting.

Most carbon sequestration project funding, $61 million, will come from the federal government. The Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership, managed by Battelle in Columbus, is contributing $32 million, including $3 million in state funding.

Before injection begins, large, dual-axle trucks would drive local highways, sending shock waves into the ground and recording data from the reverberations. Those seismic tests have been delayed because of fears that they might damage tiles that drain farm fields.

MRCSP also must apply for a state “underground injection control” permit. And it does not yet have an agreement with The Andersons Marathon Ethanol LLC, whose plant generates more than 250,000 tons of carbon dioxide each year. The injections would occur during a four-year test period.

State Rep. Jim Zehringer, R-Fort Recovery, told the crowd he has too many unanswered questions to support the project now.

“I have rarely seen a community that well organized and that strong,” said Nolan Moser of the Ohio Environmental Council, which supports the project. But he said there are dozens of proven carbon sequestration programs around the world.

“This community has not been used to oil and gas exploration,” Battelle spokeswoman Judith Bradbury said. “This is a whole new concept for them, so we have to take time to explain the issues that come up.”

County Municipal Court Judge Julie Monnin expressed concerns about a potential decline in property values and difficulty in getting man-made earthquake insurance. “Folks, if it were a good thing, Greenville wouldn’t be getting it.”

Share this article

ADD COMMENT

Comments feed

In the 1970s New York State rejected the injectin of radioactive water,tritium,for storage in deep bedrock. It was the only way for the Nuclear Fuels Reprocessing Plant at West Valley,NY to continue to operate. The reason was creating earthquakes. NY also completely rejected the storage of carbon dioxide in bedrock.This eliminated so called clean coal. Earthquakes could cause a sudden release of large amounts of carbon dioxide resulting in deaths.

William J. Kelleher
12:54 PM, 7/7/2009

REPORT ABUSE

"miseducated"? - I would like to first address what the project is for- It is to prove the theory of CO2 sequestration(storing CO2 3500 ft below ground trapped in sandstone rock)can be achieved at a level (1 million tons) which has never been done any where in the world. The objective will not reduce our oil dependence from overseas but rather to provide a means for the coal operated power plants to use clean coal technologies, they generate CO2 in the billions of tons. Is it worth the gamble?

MJ
12:10 PM, 7/7/2009

REPORT ABUSE

There is no free lunch. There is NO source of energy that has zero impact on the environment. Ethanol is not magic, but then nothing is. What ethanol DOES offer is a domestic, renewable source of energy that is cleaner than oil and oil derivatives. It is not perfect, but it is a good first step. We have only three choices. Continue our dependence on disappearing reserves of oil and suffer the national security consequences. Seek out cleaner, renewable energy sources. Stop using energy.

The Voice of Reason
5:24 PM, 7/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

As most, the people in this community as well as the individuals making comments are miseducated about both ethanol and carbon sequestration. I guess we'll just continue to send millions of dollars oversees via oil imports and employment. We'll also neglect any alternatives to oil or the carbon footprint of most industries.

CL
10:49 AM, 7/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

The CO2 sequestration is not wanted in the Greenville area. Surely, the people of this community have a say in this. I don't know who is so afraid of the CO2 the ethenol plant is putting out, but one question, why can't they just plant more trees around the plant. Trees filter the air and trees are a good green source for any community. Most of us have lived simple, healthy, and used organic methods of gardening for years, so we know what we want. We do not want this.

Lou
3:32 PM, 6/30/2009

REPORT ABUSE

There are 29 additional comments

SHOW ALL

We welcome your comments. Please remember this is a public forum and behave appropriately. Your comments must conform to our visitor's agreement.