Princeton University researchers Stephen Pacala and Robert H. Socolow include it in three of the 15 stabilisation wedge strategies they propose for reducing global carbon dioxide emissions. Economist Lord Nicholas Stern says it’s not optional for fighting climate change … it’s vitally necessary.

The “it” in question is carbon capture and storage (CCS), a process that could in theory allow us to keep burning all the coal we want and continue motoring merrily down the world’s highways while sucking up and hiding away all the nasty carbon dioxide emissions that are threatening to ruin civilisation’s cheap-energy party. The problem, though, is that “in theory” part.

Yes, carbon capture and storage is already in action at a few advanced facilities and research sites around the globe. But the scale at which it’s taking place is painfully small, considering the challenge at hand. The world’s four industrial-scale CCS plants — Sleipner, Snøhvit, Weyburn-Midale and In Salah — together soak up about 4.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year. However, fossil fuel use, cement production and land use changes annually generate around 9.9 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. We’d need more than 2,000 Sleipners et al to eliminate those emissions.

A tall order, to be sure. But the US Department of Energy (DOE) aims to have the know-how to build that many CCS plants affordably and effectively within the next eight to 10 years. That’s an even taller order, but officials are pinning their hopes on the same strategy that’s helping us to understand the causes and impacts of climate change: computer modeling and simulations.

The DOE’s new Carbon Capture and Storage Simulation Initiative, supported by $40 million in economic stimulus funds, is starting out with three key goals: develop the data needed to accurately predict the key processes involved with CCS, create advanced simulation tools to speed up the development of new types of CCS plants from concept to deployment, and find accurate and science-based ways to simulate and assess any potential risks involved with long-term storage of carbon dioxide.

And if can improve the US’ economic health along the way, all the better, says Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

“This partnership will not only help fight climate change, it will create new jobs and position the United States as a leader in carbon capture and storage technologies for years to come,” he said.

That would certainly prove to be one monumental “mission accomplished.” The next eight to 10 years will tell.

• Are hopes for a low-carbon economy fading?
• Construction starts on 1st industrial-scale CCS plant in US
• Carbon capture projects up 21% in 2010
• US: Kill CO2 by burying it
• Carbon-cutting tech: Key is to distinguish ‘possible’ from ‘viable’
• Iceland to test storing carbon dioxide in mineral form
• Carbon capture and storage: False hope or our only hope?
• Carbon capture ‘not a conspiracy against renewables’
• Carbon storage: Works in a lab, but what about real life?
• Bacteria: The low-tech fix for high-tech carbon capture?