Lawmakers and NGOs express concerns over the absence of protective measures in Malaysia's recently proposed Carbon Capture and Storage legislation

The Malaysian government has recently passed a new law governing the carbon capture, utilisation, and storage (CCUS) industry, marking a significant step towards the country's decarbonisation efforts. However, the bill has sparked debate among lawmakers and environmental groups, with concerns about its effectiveness, cost, and potential as a greenwashing tool.

Under the bill, a national CCUS agency will be established to supervise and regulate the industry. The Malaysian Department of Mineral and Geoscience (Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains Malaysia) will be responsible for overseeing this agency, which will manage the importing, transporting, and permanent storage of carbon dioxide on land and under the seabed.

However, critics have labeled the bill as an ineffective climate solution. Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal, a Malaysian member of parliament, criticized the bill for focusing on economics rather than environmental objectives. Meenakshi Raman, president of Friends of the Earth Malaysia, expressed concern about the risk of carbon dioxide leaking from storage sites.

The UK's Public Accounts Committee warned in a report that their government had not assessed the likely impact on consumer energy bills as a result of their carbon capture programme. Similarly, concerns have been raised about the potential cost burden on taxpayers and consumers in Malaysia. Lawmakers are pressing the government to reconsider the need for CCUS due to these concerns.

Despite these criticisms, the Malaysian government maintains that the CCUS industry could unlock investments of over US$200 billion over 30 years and create up to 200,000 new jobs each year. The government will not bear any costs of CCUS projects, but will collect an injection levy from project operators via the CCUS bill to cover future costs.

Globally, there have been issues with carbon dioxide leaks from CCUS projects contaminating drinking water. The government of Australia banned CCUS projects in the Great Artesian Basin due to the risk of contaminating groundwater with toxic metals. Canada's tax credit scheme for CCUS projects could cost taxpayers as much as 5.7 billion Canadian dollars (US$3.8 billion), while the operating costs of these projects exceed their income generation.

The CCUS bill's passage comes amidst ongoing consultations and briefings with lawmakers and relevant civil society groups. However, significant differences in opinion about the value of CCUS as a decarbonisation solution have led to a stalemate in discussions. Opposition lawmakers and non-governmental organizations argue that the bill is at odds with Malaysia's own decarbonisation agenda.

The Longship carbon capture and storage project in Norway could have a total capacity of 5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, with the government planning to spend 20 billion Norwegian kroner (US$1.8 billion) on it. As the debate continues in Malaysia, the future of CCUS in the country remains uncertain.

In the meantime, operators in Malaysia will still be responsible for monitoring their carbon storage sites and addressing leakages even after the site has been closed. The CCUS industry's potential to contribute to Malaysia's decarbonisation efforts is undeniable, but the concerns about its effectiveness, cost, and potential greenwashing must be addressed to ensure a sustainable future for all.

Lawmakers and NGOs express concerns over the absence of protective measures in Malaysia's recently proposed Carbon Capture and Storage legislation