Concern over Japan CO₂ storage deal

Despite government assurances, PSM questions whether this project is truly safe.

From Dr Cecilia Anthonysamy

PSM expresses serious concern over a report published by FMT revealing that carbon emissions from Japanese industries are expected to be injected into depleted gas fields in Malaysian waters.

The project – reportedly involving Mitsui & Co, Kansai Electric Power, and Petronas – is said to be formalised by the end of this year.

However, no environmental impact assessment (EIA) or public safety documentation has been made publicly available. If such assessments exist, they must be disclosed immediately.

Despite government assurances, PSM questions whether this project is truly safe.

Why isn’t Japan storing its carbon on its own soil? Why export its emissions to a country that contributes only 0.73% to global carbon emissions?

PSM calls on the natural resources and environmental sustainability ministry, or the economy ministry, to immediately:

• Disclose the full EIA related to this cross-border carbon capture, utilisation, and storage (CCUS) project.
• Reveal who the consultants are, how they are funded, and whether they operate independently.
• Clarify whether independent Malaysian scientific experts are involved in reviewing the EIA.
• Allow public scrutiny and feedback before any final agreement is signed.

In our experience, most EIAs are conducted by consultants hired by the project owners, raising serious concerns about objectivity and credibility.

Without independent, peer-reviewed science, Malaysians cannot be expected to trust the claim that such projects are safe.

Globally, among the 150 CCUS projects:

3 have experienced subsurface leakage (2%)

2 have suffered borehole leakage (1.3%)

1 involved direct geological leakage (0.7%)

1 case posed potential danger to human life (0.7%)

(Source: Jason Eleson, Senior CCUS Geologist, 2023)

While these may appear as low percentages, a single incident could have catastrophic consequences, especially in a country with limited disaster response capacity.

Research findings include:

• First-time injections into reservoirs pose the highest risk due to geological uncertainty (Benson, 2007).
• Over a 10,000-year period, there’s a 50% chance of measurable leakage, even under ideal conditions (Alcalde et al, 2018).
• Studies have flagged concerns over toxic trace elements (e.g., arsenic, selenium), the lack of long-term monitoring, and inadequate modelling under fault conditions (Gholami et al., 2021; Bin Li et al., 2025).

These findings are well documented and must not be dismissed. Clear, simplified summaries should be made public, with full references available for expert review.

Key logistical questions remain unanswered:

• How will carbon from Japan reach Malaysian waters – via undersea pipeline or pressurised shipping?
• Are any transit countries involved or consulted?
• Does the project comply with maritime and environmental regulations under UNCLOS?

These are not minor details. A leak during transit could be disastrous. The public deserves clear answers.

Even if Petronas stands to earn billions and generate thousands of jobs, these economic benefits do not justify:

• The absence of a public EIA
• The withholding of risk disclosures

Malaysia’s lack of disaster preparedness

Development without safety is reckless, not progressive.

If Japan’s carbon is to be stored at the Kasawari or Lang Lebah fields off Sarawak’s coast, PSM strongly urges civil society groups, scientists, and indigenous communities in Sarawak to demand full disclosure and consultation.

The people of Sarawak must have a voice in deciding whether foreign carbon can be buried beneath their seafloor for centuries to come.

PSM calls for an urgent town hall meeting hosted by the natural resources and environmental sustainability ministry or the economy ministry involving:

• Independent geologists and environmental scientists
• Civil society organisations
• Affected coastal communities
• The general public

We must not base national environmental decisions on vague assurances like “projects must align with climate goals”.

What we need is action, transparency, and informed public consent, not just corporate partnerships and ministerial pledges.

PSM fully supports rigorous, peer-reviewed science and is not opposed to technological innovation.

But without full public disclosure, independent assessment, and transparent governance, Malaysia risks becoming a carbon dumping ground for industrialised nations.

Climate justice must prioritise people over profit, sovereignty over subservience, and science over spin. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT..

Dr Cecilia Anthonysamy is a member of PSM’s environmental, climate crisis & indigenous peoples bureau.