PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Apr 30, 2024
Carbon Sequestration Collaboration Act
This bill modifies the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to revise and expand the Department of Energy's program to research, develop, demonstrate, and commercialize carbon storage. Specifically, it directs the program to include terrestrial carbon sequestration (i.e., the storage of carbon in plants and biomass) and carbon sequestration in geologic formations (e.g., carbon sequestration in basins or aquifers).
The Department of Energy (DOE) must also annually submit a long-term strategic and prioritized research plan that identifies and addresses scientific challenges for widespread adoption of terrestrial carbon sequestration and carbon sequestration in geological formations. DOE must submit the first research plan within two years of this bill's enactment.
People & committees
Rep. Baird, James R. [R-IN-4] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 364 - 44 (Roll no. 156). (text: 04/29/2024 CR H2654-2655)
House roll call 156 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 364 - 44 (Roll no. 156). (text: 04/29/2024 CR H2654-2655)
House roll call 156 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2712-2713)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4824.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2654-2656)
Mr. Lucas moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 173.
Reported by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 118-213.
Reported by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 118-213.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 35 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4824 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4824 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4824 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4824 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.