Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not enough in itself, but it is a
significant part of what needs to be done. If we are to go on burning
easily accessible fossil fuels until they have all gone – and so far it appears that we are going to – then it is better to do it in a way that puts less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Power stations will still emit some carbon dioxide, and the technology is far from perfect, but CCS is starting to look politically feasible now, whereas serious cuts in consumption and most of 2% For The Planet’s proposals are not yet. The UK government announced in April 2009 that it will not allow new coal-burning power stations to be built without CCS.

They are only insisting on 25% of carbon being captured, and it does not apply to existing power stations, so it is not yet adequate but it is a start, and it gives us a chance to do some research into CCS on a commercial scale. Nicholas Stern, economist and author of the influential Stern Review, pointed out in his 2009 book, A blueprint for a safer planet, that “we need to know now if CCS can work on a commercial scale and whether the transport and storage of CCS can work on a commercial scale and whether the transport and storage of CO2 can be done safely”. Generally, technology becomes cheaper and more effective and efficient, as we use it, learn from our mistakes and test new developments. Given that China, India, Poland and other countries are planning to build hundreds more coal-fired power stations over the next few decades, then the earlier we invest in CCS and in geoengineering projects such as carbon scrubbing, the better.

For the technical details about CCS, see this Guardian article on CCS. Where does the money come from? A Tobin-style tax on financial transactions (also known as the 'Robin Hood' tax) of 0.05% could raise around 400 billion US dollars per year.