Sambhaji -

That is when you "store" industrial/fossil-fuel-created carbon dioxide underground. 

I am a statistician, not an engineer, but to me, it sounds like a horrible accident waiting to happen.  Perhaps it isn't, but common sense, I think, would indicate it needs extreme justification, I think, not political expediency. 

Any engineers out there who are certain about this?  I have often wondered.

Best wishes -

Jim

PS - Regarding a "measure," I would think that number of cubic meters stored at a given pressure per cubic meter would be important.  

-  Then I suppose you would need information about rock formations and strata, tensile strengths and porousness.  Also measures of strength of capping technologies, and geographic flaw probabilities.  ??? 

These are guesses.  You might need a great deal more. 

I know that the US Department of Energy had an office regarding carbon sequestration in the headquarters where I worked for the (independent) US Energy Information Administration, so they may be able to help ... but good luck getting any useful information on carbon sequestration from the current US DOE under the present ridiculous and apparently morally challenged administration.   

Dear Sambhaji, dear James

sequestration is a bit more than "storing it under ground" but I agree to the notion "maybe not sucha  good idea" - at least without more research on long term effects.

Sequestration, broadly spoken, means binding the carbon products by certain processes, for example naturally by forestation. The whole process can also be combined with energy generation (e.g. BioFuel from Seaweed) but for a more detailed overview I recommend the following:

Sedjo, Roger; Sohngen, Brent (2012). "Carbon Sequestration in Forests and Soils". Annual Review of Resource Economics. Annual Reviews. 4: 127–144

Gibbins, Jon; Chalmers, Hannah (December 2008). "Carbon Capture and Storage". Energy Policy. 36 (12): 4317–4322

Spath, Pamela L.; Mann, Margaret K. (September 22, 2002). The Net Energy and Global Warming Potential of Biomass Power compared to Coal-fired Electricity with CO2 Sequestration - A Life Cycle Approach

Spellman, F.R., 2016. The science of renewable energy, Second edition. ed. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton.    

Kind Regards

Roland

 Better consider this then, while it is available:

 https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ccs/

Any method to store or change the form of CO2 to store and get rid of its emission to the atmosphere.

Kenneth -

Do you have a solution in mind for climate change?  Is the melting of earth's polar caps irreversible?  (I hope not.)

Regarding coal: I know, from working at the US EIA for many years, that reliance on coal for electric power in the US has dropped substantially.  The US coal industry is not happy, but I don't see how we can stay with coal ... and black lung disease.   Are you saying that that will never be enough?  What else do you suggest? 

(Sambhaji -  Sorry for this diversion from your original question, but I think this is important, and related.  Thank you.)

[Climate change, by the way, is not part of my expertise.  I basically just estimated missing data for finite populations - i.e., from energy establishment surveys for official statistics.] 

Cheers - Jim

Well, I am not a climate change expert, but a lot of other people are who agree that there is a problem that could spiral out of hand.  I don't think it is popular to tell people what they don't want to hear, so I can't see that as a very politically advantageous position.    Meaning I think climate change denial is the position that is politically expedient, easy, and potentially extremely irresponsible.  People want to hear that there is no problem rather than listen to the clear majority of experts who say that there is a problem that needs attention.  A northwest passage may seem helpful for commerce, but the cycle of climate changes isn't supposed to be like this.  

I am not belong to this field but found it interesting to know: a natural or artificial process by which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere and held in solid or liquid form.

Carbon sequestration is a process where carbon dioxide is pulled from the atmosphere and stored for a long period of time. Please have a look at below given link for details.

https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/niacs/carbon/forests/carbon_sequestration/

https://www.researchgate.net/post/what_is_a_standard_method_to_calculate_carbon_sequestration_by_trees

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_any_device_instrument_for_measuring_the_amount_of_carbon_sequestered_by_plants

Plz refer to the following web links..

http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/389859/Principles-and-Processes-of-Carbon-Sequestration-by-Trees.pdf

https://www.broward.org/NaturalResources/ClimateChange/Documents/Calculating%20CO2%20Sequestration%20by%20Trees.pdf

Appreciating some mind boggling responses from Kenneth, what is your candid opinion , is it not a carbon sequestration if  we increase crop productivity with better input-use-efficiency..? If we increase NPP ( Net primary productivity ) of a crop through any management practices..?

Anoop - 

Trees would retain their captured carbon if used in building materials, not burned.  (They could buy us time to study.)  They might also substantially clean the air.  There are other reasons as well to want trees planted, which each of us may favor, such as wildlife habitation.  I'm 'all for' trees.    :-)  

Jim

Carbon sequestration refers to the removal and storage of carbon from the atmosphere in the so called 'carbon sinks'  (forests, soils, geologic formations and oceans) through physical and/or biological processes (e.g. photosynthesis). It can be of artificial and natural origin. 

Sounds like I am being misrepresented.  

Clean technology can create jobs, by the way, for healthier living.  Consider, coal is dirty.  Consider pollution in China.  (My wife's mother died of an asthma episode there, as a matter of fact.)   Remember Los Angeles reputation?  Or fires on polluted waters?  Remember acid rain?  It may not be popular to make businesses/industry clean up, but it is important. 

The overwhelming majority of experts believe there is substantial evidence that there is a potentially disastrous climate change problem looming.  For many, in some ways, it may be too late.   I just thought perhaps that man-made  carbon sequestration may not be a very good response, but I don't know. 

Nope.  Global cooling is not a good argument.  Think aerosols and old, inadequate pop 'science,' so not justified, as explained here:

 https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/07/globalwarmingdeniers

Fascinating response Kenneth, i agree with you . but , dont you think , somewhere good agriculture practices also aid in carbon sequestration. Thats one issue.  Second issue , i want to raise is , how far , these perennial crops( Citrus, apple, mango etc) facilitate in carbon sequestration considering their long life of 50-60 years with perennial framework( James has agood point ), besides  having good ability to translocate a significant proportion of plant assimilated carbon towards root system, so that soil is also kept biologically active...

Nice informative feedback Anev, appreciate it...My another quarry to Kenneth , James , Anev , do you feel , integrated soil fertility management  could facilitate in developing climate smart soil, especially under perennial fruits..?

This, in a way, has gotten a long ways from the question topic of carbon sequestration.  But in addition to

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/07/globalwarmingdeniers

which explains the history of what was actually said and began to be learned early in climate studies, rather than what might be a popular misconception by non-scientists, as explained there, I'll leave it at this NASA webpage on the imbalance of atmospheric heating and cooling: 

 https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Aerosols/page3.php

In there we see that "Models estimate that aerosols have had a cooling effect that has counteracted about half of the warming caused by the build-up of greenhouse gases since the 1880s." 

As for addressing this issue, after all of this study, I don't think that there is a practical chance that something radically beyond the Paris agreement is likely to be given serious consideration in the forseeable future. Some people may come up with radical plans sooner, but needed or not, that just isn't going to happen.  

"Jim... Agree again. The 'plan' that Paris has put us on is radical enough. Hard to see how it could get worse...."  

Wow.  I did not say that at all! 

I did not want to respond again, as this has become unproductive, but I have to say, Ken, that in my opinion, you have repeatedly misrepresented what I have said.  I do not appreciate it. Goodbye.  Please do not address me again.  

Carbon sequestration is fixation of carbon or carbon dioxide and its containment or storage so that it cannot readily participate in the dynamic carbon cycle. The ultimate objective is to control greenhouse effect either by storage at source and subsequent or locking or fixation in forests, oceans, wetlands, soils, etc. Both the natural and artificial measure can do that. Naturally forests and oceans serve as huge sink. Human can facilitate it through afforestation, soil amendment, or other biological sequestration techniques. Geological engineering may also be adopted. 

The following links may give some ideas about calculation of carbon sequestration:

https://www.broward.org/.../Calculating%20CO2%20Sequestration%20by%20Trees.pdf

http://ipclimatechange.trg-learning.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Measurement-guidelines-for-the-sequestration-of-forest-carbon.pdf

http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction-fund/cfi/methodologies/methodology-proposals/measuring-carbon-sequestration

http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1063&context=thsci

( for Testing methods for the estimation of carbon sequestration in wetlands)