This site is no longer updated (since 2016/17) But there are still useful info here
CCS Knowledgebase CCS Database Links About ZERO

PurGen One

Brief description:


Main developer: SCS Energy

Country: USA

Project type: Capture Storage

Scale: Small

Status: Cancelled

Capital cost: $5.2 billion

Industry: Chemical products

Capture method: Other

Capture technology: Other
New or retrofit: New
Transport of CO2 by: Pipeline

Type of storage: Aquifers


According to SCS Energy's website, PurGen is no longer under development, with commercial structure and design being moved to the company's Hydrogen Energy California project.

The PurGen One Project, being developed by SCS Energy LLC, proposed a 750MW IGCC power plant plus a manufacturing facility producing hydrogen commodities at the site of a former chemical plant in Linden, New Jersey. The $5.2 billion, privately developed project planned to capture and transport 10 million tonnes of CO2 a year, and claimed access to geologic storage for around 1 trillion tonnes of CO2.

The project was to use integrated gasification combined cycle technology, with coal - to be delivered by rail or barge - being converted to a synthetic gas. After removal of CO2 and other gases, the remaining gas would have been used to produce hydrogen commodities, such as urea, which is used for pollution control in cars, industrial plants and for fertilizer, and to power a combined cycle power plant.

The project, which was subject to intense local opposition, had expected extensive regulatory scrutiny by federal, state, and local agencies.


No longer under development.

More information

SCS Energy cancels 750MW coal gasification with CCS project, 24 October 2012

Coalition claims victory, 22 October 2012


The offshore repository selected for PurGen One, seventy miles off New Jersey's coast, has been extensively characterized in the course of offshore oil and gas exploration and is nearly identical to the geology of the Sleipner field in the North Sea. A major difference is that the formation where PurGen One's carbon dioxide would have been stored is deeper and covered by a thicker and more dependable cap rock than the formation successfully used at Sleipner. Captured CO2 from the plant would have been stored in a geologic repository 8000 feet below the ocean floor and more than seventy miles from shore.

Contact info

Main developer: SCS Energy

Companies involved