Dozens of carbon sequestration projects are being developed across the United States, funded by generous tax credits, but residents in small towns like Clymers, Indiana, are organizing to stop them. Melissa Harrison, a resident of Clymers, fears the project could be the end of her town. 'This is our place,' she said, noting that generations of her family are buried in the local cemetery and she is raising her five grandchildren there.
Local project spearheaded by ethanol plant
A local ethanol plant, part of the Andersons Renewables, has proposed burying carbon dioxide deep in geologic formations under the town and surrounding farms. The project is one of dozens expected to receive approval from the Environmental Protection Agency and state regulators in the next year. The tax credits, authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act and continued under the Trump administration, offer $85 per ton of stored carbon, creating what analysts call a 'carbon-capture gold rush.'
Residents voice concerns over health and environment
Harrison said Clymers is already overburdened by hazards from industrial agriculture facilities, including a fertilizer supplier, a hazardous waste recycling company, and the ethanol plant. The community faces contaminated well water, a lack of sewage facilities, and high poverty rates. 'If they make Clymers bad enough that no one wants to live here, they can take over the whole town, real cheap,' she said.
Residents received letters offering $150 a year in exchange for having carbon storage under their properties. Farmer Dennis Crume refused to sign, saying, 'I said that’s bullcrap. I’m worried about my well.' Indiana state law essentially strips individual landowners of the right to reject such proposals, experts say.
Company defends safety of carbon storage
In a statement, the Andersons Renewables said the project 'is a safe, established technology, with a rigorous permitting, engineering, and monitoring process to protect groundwater, public health, and the surrounding environment.' The company added that it would capture carbon dioxide from ethanol production, compress it, and inject it more than 3,000 feet underground into geologic formations identified for permanent storage. The site’s suitability was determined through seismic analysis and a test well.
Critics question benefits and highlight risks
Environmental groups criticize the projects, saying they subsidize oil and gas companies and don’t reliably cut emissions. Kerwin Olson, executive director of Citizens Action Coalition, noted that a small project sequestering 200,000 metric tons of carbon per year can earn $17 million annually through the 45Q tax credit. Larger projects plan to sequester tens of millions of tons. 'You’re talking billions of dollars,' he said.
Risks of carbon storage include earthquakes, water table contamination, and potential carbon leaks. In 2024, the nation’s first commercial carbon capture project developed two leaks under a lake providing drinking water for central Illinois, prompting a state ban on new CCS projects under one of the largest aquifers. In 2020, a pipeline rupture in Mississippi hospitalized 45 people and forced 200 to evacuate.
Expert opinions divided on carbon capture
Charles Harvey, a professor at MIT who helped start an early carbon sequestration company, now opposes the strategy, calling it 'the stupidest way to reduce emissions.' He believes the money should be spent on renewable energy. 'It is loved by the industry because it’s a subsidy for whatever they’re already doing,' he said.
Brad Johnston, an analyst at Enverus, said companies are being extra careful to avoid setbacks. 'I think a lot of these operators are very diligent about doing it right and probably overbuilding a lot of these systems,' he said.
