English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Zoback and Gorelick (1) highlight the importance of considering the potential for induced seismicity in geologic carbon storage (GCS) projects. We agree that site characterization is needed for safe CO2 storage; that is, without inducing large earthquakes (M > 4) that might jeopardize the stability and sealing capacity of caprock and faults (2). Zoback and Gorelick (1) argue that the subsurface is critically stressed and small pore pressure increases could induce large seisms. However, sedimentary formations, where CO2 will be stored, are rarely critically stressed (see figure 1 and Supporting Information of ref. 2 for details and references) because they are softer than the crystalline basement and thus …

Reply to Zoback and Gorelick: Geologic carbon storage remains a safe strategy to significantly reduce CO 2 emissions

Reply to Zoback and Gorelick: Geologic carbon storage remains a safe strategy to significantly reduce CO ₂ emissions