🚀 go-pugleaf

Lovely long word.  Or, to give it its alternative title: carbon capture and 
sequestration (CCS).
  What do you do with chimney smoke, if you can't fully recycle it?  You 
bury the problem.
   Yes, all the components of the smoke can be dealt with - except carbon 
dioxide; a seemingly intractable problem.  (Not that CO2 is an inert gas by 
any means.)
   So, let's bury it deep underground.
   Not a bad idea, in one sense, as it is better than polluting the 
atmosphere.
   But, as with nuclear waste, burial is a half-measure, like sweeping dust 
under the rug.
   The waste: gaseous, nuclear, or domestic - is still there.
   And if you bury the carbon of CO2, you also bury the oxygen, at two for 
one.
   True, oxygen comprises some 20% of the atmosphere, but can we afford to 
lose too much?
   Alright, you bury the CO2, in liquid, compressed, form.  Will it burst 
forth, en masse, at some future time, to asphyxiate all and sundry? 
(Earthquake, volcano?)
   Ideally, we could continue to burn fossil fuels (until all gone), 
provided we totally recycle the waste products, or substantially purify 
them.  We do it with sewage.
   A Carbon Tax or Trade is a feeble first step.  Is CCS the next, or not 
worth the effort?