Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a technology that captures carbon dioxide (CO₂) from industrial sources like power plants and stores it underground in geologic formations, such as depleted oil and gas fields. CCS is often hailed by advocates as the knight in shining armor for combatting climate change—because at first glance, it appears to prevent CO₂ emissions from entering the atmosphere while allowing carbon-emitting industries to continue operating. But—and you knew there was a but—a closer look reveals that our purported hero is wearing tinfoil. After all, if the solution to a climate crisis involves giving tax credits to the heavily subsidized and highly profitable oil and gas industry to do more of what they’ve always done (get more oil out of the ground—just this time using CO₂) one has to question if the goal is reducing emissions—or padding industry profits.

The federal government pulls all the levers to inflate CCS. Through direct research and development funding, loan guarantees for facilities, and a lucrative tax credit, federal lawmakers are hot and heavy on CCS. The 45Q tax credit, designed to incentivize the expansion of CCS, offers up to $180 for every ton of carbon captured and stored underground. However, in its current form, it’s nearly impossible for federal taxpayers—who foot the bill for these expensive tax credits to coal, oil and gas, and ethanol companies—to know how much carbon is actually being stored underground, or whether it’s even staying there. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which administers the 45Q credit, permits some facilities to self-certify the volumes they report, meaning a company official can simply rubber-stamp the reported figures. No federal agency performs onsite verification of the volume of carbon captured or injected underground, and the IRS does not disclose how many tons of carbon companies have claimed under the 45Q credit. As a result, there’s no way for the public to know how much carbon was actually captured and then subsequently stored.

And it gets worse (for taxpayers, at least—industries cashing in on 45Q are probably thrilled). The IRS doesn’t require 45Q claimants to maintain records of stored carbon for more than three years. After that, even if the carbon leaks—which is not unlikely, as carbon leakage associated with carbon injection projects can go on for decades—there is no recourse. Operators have to wait just three years until, no matter what, they are in the clear and are guaranteed to keep their tax credits. So, it’s basically a “capture it and forget it” approach, and taxpayers, communities, and the environment are put at risk if carbon leaks out after the 3-year period.

Fortunately, there have been efforts to address these glaring oversight gaps. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Angus King (I-ME), and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), recognizing existing loopholes, are leading the charge for stronger guardrails for the 45Q credit. Last month, the lawmakers sent a letter to the IRS, urging it to step up its oversight of 45Q. The letter calls for third-party verification of the data submitted to the IRS and a longer claw-back period—the time after receiving a tax credit during which the IRS can rescind it—in case stored carbon leaks. In other words, they are pushing for more accountability from companies financially benefiting from 45Q. Dozens of community groups, scientists, and taxpayer watchdogs have called for similar action.

In addition to these insufficiencies at the IRS, the only commercially viable use of captured carbon right now is Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), a process where captured carbon is pumped into depleted oil and gas wells to extract—you guessed it—more oil. So, in practice, the vast majority of “climate-friendly” 45Q credits go to companies capturing carbon solely to produce more…oil and the resulting carbon.

Luckily for taxpayers, there’s momentum on the Hill to address this blatant handout to the oil and gas industry. Congressman Khanna is leading the effort to eliminate EOR as a qualified end use under 45Q. Removing EOR from the list of “approved” uses for captured carbon would align 45Q more closely with its intended purpose—reducing emissions—rather than turning it into a self-licking (ice cap melting) ice cream cone.

But that’s the catch. Can CCS really make the gains we need to move towards cleaner energy? Unfortunately, capturing CO₂ emissions from power plants and industrial sites and burying them deep underground rarely captures emissions at the planned rate. CCS is also prohibitively expensive. Building and operating CCS plants costs a fortune, and the infrastructure needed to securely transport and store carbon safely is massive. Naturally, taxpayers are footing the bill, as our federal government subsidizes the technology from cradle to grave.

If CCS is going to be part of our climate strategy, we need to get serious about oversight and accountability. That means ensuring every ton of carbon captured is securely stored. No more lax reporting that leaves room for fraud and abuse. And no more handing out money to companies that are using captured carbon to subsidize drilling for more oil. If we’re going to throw billions of taxpayer dollars at this technology, we need to make sure it’s doing what it’s supposed to—reducing emissions, not padding the pockets of the fossil fuel industry. Warren, King, and Khanna are on the right track. If we’re going to test CCS as a viable climate solution, we need to do it right, with stronger safeguards in place to ensure that the 45Q tax credit isn’t just another corporate giveaway masquerading as climate policy. Taxpayers are already bearing the burden of climate-fueled rising disaster costs. With the feds on track to spend more than $30 billion on 45Q over the next decade—we can’t afford to get it wrong.