Exposé, Part I: Cracks in the Promise — What the Science Really Shows About CCS

Louisiana officials repeat it often: “We’re going to look at the science.” But when we examine the latest independent, peer-reviewed research, the story is not one of reassurance. It is one of risk.

A 2025 study published in Scientific Reports modeled what happens when carbon dioxide (CO₂) is injected underground for carbon capture and storage (CCS). Using advanced simulations, scientists tested three different geological formations — all with cracks or faults in the rock layers meant to trap CO₂.

What they found should stop every elected official, regulator, and citizen in Louisiana in their tracks.

The Findings Are Clear

• Cracks equal leaks. When CO₂ was injected under an anticline dome (a common geological structure in Louisiana), the gas pooled and leaked through nearby cracks at far higher rates than in flatter formations.
  
  
• Even “good” sites aren’t foolproof. In flatter formations, CO₂ still escaped through weaknesses — tens of thousands of kilograms per year in the early decades.
  
  
• Stair-step formations still leaked. More complex topography slowed leakage but didn’t eliminate it.
  
  
• Groundwater is at risk. Dissolved CO₂ dropped water pH and created conditions that, in other studies, have released toxic metals like arsenic, lead, and uranium into aquifers.
  
  

Why This Matters for Louisiana

These findings confirm what citizens across Louisiana have been warning: our aquifers are one crack away from contamination. The Chicot Aquifer — drinking water for 15 parishes — is not a lab experiment. It is our lifeline.

Every town hall meeting we’ve attended carries the same questions from residents:

• What happens if CO₂ leaks into our water wells?
  
  
• What happens when companies abandon these sites?
  
  
• What happens to us when the federal subsidies run out, but the risk remains?
  
  

Industry representatives never answer these directly. They fall back on the same phrase: “The science says it’s safe.”

But the science — the independent science — shows something else.

A Legacy of Leaks

Louisiana is no stranger to underground risks. Thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells puncture our landscape, many poorly sealed or forgotten. These wells can act as pathways for migrating CO₂, connecting deep injection zones with shallow groundwater.

Add in Louisiana’s fault lines and fractured geology, and the “ideal storage sites” described in glossy presentations begin to look like Swiss cheese.

If a peer-reviewed simulation shows leakage in perfect conditions, what happens here, where conditions are far from perfect?

The Scale of the Risk

One of the most revealing parts of the study is how small leaks still matter.

Even a leakage rate of just 1–2% over time undermines the entire purpose of CCS. Billions in tax credits are handed out to bury carbon underground. If that carbon slips back into the atmosphere or poisons aquifers, Louisiana communities are left with the danger, while corporations keep the profits.

And let’s be clear: CO₂ leakage isn’t just about climate. High concentrations of CO₂ are deadly. In confined areas, it displaces oxygen. The Lake Nyos disaster in Cameroon killed over 1,700 people when naturally stored CO₂ erupted into the air. That was a natural release. We are proposing to manufacture those risks here in Louisiana.

Citizens Are Paying Attention

Across Allen, Vernon, Rapides, Livingston, and other parishes, residents have become researchers in their own right. They trade maps, pore over permits, and consult independent geologists who volunteer their time to explain risks.

A mother in Vernon Parish put it simply at a recent meeting:

“We live here. We drink this water. They are asking us to gamble with our lives for tax credits. That’s not science. That’s greed.”

Her words echo the central truth: CCS may be profitable, but that does not make it safe.

The False Sense of Reassurance

At nearly every public forum, state officials assure citizens that “everything will be monitored” and that “injection wells are carefully regulated.”

But history tells a different story. Communities around Lake Maurepas were kept in the dark until pipelines were already underway. Hearings are often scheduled quietly in Baton Rouge, miles away from the communities most affected.

The people are left out of the process, while the narrative of “scientific safety” is broadcast from well-funded institutions with deep ties to industry.

Looking at the Real Science

This is where the new Scientific Reports study cuts through the spin. Unlike industry-sponsored reports, this was not written by consultants paid by Exxon or Oxy. It was peer-reviewed, published openly, and designed to test whether cracks and faults matter.

The conclusion is unavoidable: they do.

Cracks and faults are not hypothetical. They are everywhere in Louisiana geology. Ignoring them is not science — it’s wishful thinking.

The Transition to Part II

If independent science shows CCS is a gamble, why do Louisiana citizens always hear the opposite from officials?

The answer lies in who controls the narrative. On one side, unpaid geologists and citizen advocates spend their free time raising alarms. On the other side, the Center for Energy Studies at LSU — led by Dr. Greg Upton — produces polished reports that always emphasize safety.

What’s the difference? The Center for Energy Studies is funded by the very corporations pushing CCS. ExxonMobil. Oxy. CapturePoint. And six of the largest oil and gas companies sit directly on its advisory board, alongside two of Louisiana’s most powerful lobbying groups.

When your paycheck depends on saying something is safe, how often will you find risks?

A Call to Action

This is why CO₂ Chronicles exists. We are independent. We are fearless. We are supported 100% by citizens — not corporations, not lobbyists, not politicians.

If you want the truth — the facts that no one else in Louisiana is willing to report — you are in the right place.

👉 Part II of this exposé, “Science for Sale,” will reveal exactly how industry money is shaping the science that parishes and legislators rely on. You won’t see it in the Advocate. You won’t see it on the evening news. But you will see it here.

To read Part II and support truly independent reporting, become a subscriber today.

[ Subscribe Now to Unlock Part II → ]

Part II — Science for Sale: How Industry Money Shapes the “Facts” About CCS in Louisiana

When communities ask for the science, they expect studies that are independent, peer-reviewed, and transparent. What they have often been handed instead are polished reports, slide decks, and reassuring testimony produced or promoted by institutions that accept millions from the very companies selling carbon capture projects. That’s not a small detail — it’s the central conflict of interest driving Louisiana’s CCS debate.