A new weapon is emerging to help us fight climate change. It is becoming feasible to take carbon dioxide from power stations and industry, and lock it away safely before it can enter the atmosphere. In the next few years, major demonstration programmes will start up in the USA, EU and elsewhere. But can carbon capture compete with other low-carbon technologies, is it safe and environmentally-friendly, and will people and governments accept it? "Capturing Carbon" examines the need for carbon capture, and the technologies, existing and emerging, that make it work. It describes geological storage and, uniquely, compares it to biological carbon sequestration in soils and forests. It looks at the costs, the economics, and how big a contribution carbon capture can make to avoiding dangerous climate change. It covers the policies that need to be in place, the public reaction, and the opportunities for business. Finally, it gives a hard-headed description of the risks of carbon capture projects. The book is the first comprehensive yet accessible study of the subject. It is a vital resource for environmentalists, policy-makers, investors, academics, industry specialists and anyone else wishing to understand this fast-moving field.

With oil around $100 a barrel, drivers wince whenever they pull into the gas station and businesses watch their bottom lines shrink. "Watch out," say doomsayers, "it will only get worse as oil dries up." It's a plausible argument, especially considering the rate at which countries like China and India are now sucking up oil. Even more troubling, the world's largest oil fields sit in geopolitical hotspots like Iran and Iraq. Some believe their nations need to secure remaining supplies using military force, while others consider dwindling supplies a blessing that will help solve the problem of global warming. But wait--is it really the "end of oil"? Absolutely not, says geologist, economist, and industry-insider Robin Mills. According to Mills, many ideas about petroleum depletion and its consequences are not just grossly overstated but plain wrong. Calmly and persuasively, he argues: