Summary/Abstract
This report determines the best practices that exist within the written CCS legislation of other states when compared to Alberta’s law. By examining CCS legislation passed in Wyoming, Kansas, Montana and the States of Victoria and Queensland in Australia an understanding of the positive and negative elements of the written CCS legislation in Alberta is formed. In order to understand where the Albertan legislation fails, the report address three policy problems that currently sit within The Carbon Capture and Storage Amendments Act. These are: 1. Payments into the Post Closure Stewardship Fund 2. Monitoring Measurement and Verification (MMV) Plans 3. Time frames for the transfer of liability The report concludes that Kansas’ coverage of fees is preferable to look at for CCS in Alberta, the State of Victoria has the most comprehensive MMV plans to learn from and, that Montana’s time frames for the transfer of liability will ensure a smoother transition once liability is taken over by the government. Knowledge sharing from other jurisdictions is vital to determine where Alberta’s laws fall flat. In order to ensure that legal coverage for the sequestration of CO2 in Alberta is undertaken properly it is important that the Government of Alberta correct these policy issues in order to ensure a well-functioning legal environment is in place.