Corn Growth and Development influenced by Potential CO2 Leakage from Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Site

Kim, You Jin; Chen, Xuanlin; He, Wenmei; Yoo, Gayoung

doi:10.15531/ksccr.2017.8.3.257

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they are comparable with values measured in the outdoor field facility ASGARD and the higher CO 2 levels in the gradient site reported by Moni and Rasse . Laboratory‐based systems show similar levels to those reported …”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Lake

Lomax

2019

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been proposed as a bridging technology to enable the transition to an energy system based on renewable sources. Many high CO2‐emitting industries (such as the power industry) are distant from potential carbon storage sites (such as offshore geological reservoirs) and an infrastructure of CO2 transportation must therefore be developed to carry the CO2 to safe storage. As such there is a need to understand the risks involved and the mitigation of potential leaks associated with CCS and dense‐phase CO2 transportation networks. Since 2012 a number of experimental studies have provided a mechanistic understanding of the risks posed to crops as a function of CO2 leakage from CCS infrastructure. However, what remains largely unresolved is the role played by both soil type and soil structure in mitigating and / or enhancing plant stresses. In this study we provide an experimental framework to evaluate these effects. Wheat and beetroot were grown in four different experimental soils to test the effects of specific soil attributes (organic, low pH; organic, open structure; organic, limed; loam, neutral pH) on crop performance when exposed to high levels (∼40%) of CO2 in the soil environment. Comparison between treatment and controls and across the soil types reveals little difference in terms of biomass or plant stress chemistry. From a stakeholder perspective these findings suggest that soil type may play only a minor role in mitigating or amplifying plant stress in response to the unlikely event of a CO2 leak from CCS infrastructure. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The nearest equivalent study system is that of Kim et al . and Yoo who did specifically measure vegetation responses but did not investigate different soil types.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Lake

Lomax

2019

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When water and other nutrients are supplied, photosynthate can be utilized for the synthesis of cells and tissues . However, high soil CO 2 concentration inhibits water and nutrient absorption by plants, resulting in an accumulation of starch in the roots rather than formation of cells and tissues …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The artificial CO 2 injection was carried out in a greenhouse experimental system established at Kyung Hee University in Geyonggi‐do, South Korea. To inject CO 2 gas into the soils, an acrylic growth box was customized, composed of a set of three flowerpots (30 × 20 × 20 cm, height × width × length) on top of the gas chamber . Each pot had nine holes covered with mesh to disperse the injected CO 2 from the gas chamber to the pots.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To inject CO 2 gas into the soils, an acrylic growth box was customized, composed of a set of three flowerpots (30 × 20 × 20 cm, height × width × length) on top of the gas chamber. 20,24 Each pot had nine holes covered with mesh to disperse the injected CO 2 from the gas chamber to the pots. The gas chamber was connected to a gas inlet through a valve.…”

Section: Greenhouse Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Suggestions for plant parameters to monitor potential CO₂ leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) sites

Kim

Yoo

2019

Greenhouse Gases

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential CO2 leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities should be monitored and managed carefully. Biomonitoring technologies for CO2 leakage using plants could be very effective, especially in areas near transport pipelines, because of the extensive areas that they can cover. A greenhouse study was conducted to investigate whether early changes in plant parameters could be an effective indicator to detect leaked CO2. Corn (Zea mays), which was reported to be a CO2‐tolerant species, was selected to identify specific indicators of CO2 leakage. The mean soil CO2 concentration for soil treated with CO2 was 20–40%, which is similar to the concentration that could occur near transport pipelines through slow‐insidious seepage. In the soil treated with CO2, the number of yellow leaves at the canopy level was significantly increased from the sixth day of CO2 injection compared to the control. The chlorophyll content in green leaves was significantly reduced on the eighth day from CO2 injection. The soil water content in the treated soil was increased from the sixth day of injection due to reduced root adsorption. The results of this study implied that early changes in parameters of CO2‐tolerant species such as canopy‐level discoloration and chlorophyll content could be used as CO2‐specific indicators for the detection of soil CO2 leakage. We suggested that canopy‐level monitoring is a promising, useful technique for soil CO2 leakage in extensive areas, such as near CO2 transport pipelines. In addition, rhizosphere‐level parameters, such as soil water content, could be good subsidiary indicators together with the large‐scale collection of baseline data and statistical analysis. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Risks and uncertainties in carbon capture, transport, and storage projects: A comprehensive review

Mahjour,

Faroughi

2023

Gas Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corn Growth and Development influenced by Potential CO2 Leakage from Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Site

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Suggestions for plant parameters to monitor potential CO₂ leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) sites

Risks and uncertainties in carbon capture, transport, and storage projects: A comprehensive review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Corn Growth and Development influenced by Potential CO2 Leakage from Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Site

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO2 pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO2 pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Suggestions for plant parameters to monitor potential CO2 leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) sites

Risks and uncertainties in carbon capture, transport, and storage projects: A comprehensive review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Plant responses to simulated carbon capture and storage (CCS) CO₂ pipeline leakage: the effect of soil type

Suggestions for plant parameters to monitor potential CO₂ leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) sites