Summary/Abstract
This article proceeds in four parts. Part I provides an overview of CCS, focusing on geologic sequestration, and analyzes the scientific work on the potential for releases of CO2 and brine from sequestration reservoirs. Part II evaluates the comparative advantages of government regulation and common law liability; this background leads into a critical analysis of current concerns about long-term liability and moral hazard. Part III examines the relative efficiencies of different doctrines of common law liability when applied to likely releases from sequestration sites. The paper finds support for negligence and strict liability, but the deterrence value of both doctrines will be limited to a subset of important near-term risks. Collectively these sections demonstrate that the debate misdiagnoses the primary risks and overlooks operational factors that simplify application of common law liability. In part IV, the paper proposes a hybrid legal framework that combines a traditional regulatory regime with a novel two-tiered system of liability that is calibrated to objective site characteristics. This framework balances principles of economic efficiency and the realities of political viability.