This plan is more hype than hope. The CO2 maybe a liquid coming out of the pump but a depths where the oil is temps are way beyond the triple critical point of CO2 so it will be a high pressure gas. Using CO2 this way leaves nothing sequestered. True sequestration can only happen in a solid form such as charcoal from biomass or through cultivation of shellfish. The easiest way to sequester fossil carbon is to not take it to the surface in the first place.
tom deplume said

> way beyond the triple critical
> point of CO2 so it will be a high
> pressure gas

There is no such thing as a "critical triple point" - I think tom is mixing two concepts

Triple point = unique temperature and pressure at which solid, liquid and gas are in equilibrium (i.e. coexist). The triple point of carbon dioxide occurs at a pressure of 5.2 atm (3952 torr) and 216.6 K (-56.4oC).

Critical point = unique T and p at which liquid and gas phases are identical. The critical temperature for carbon dioxide is 31.1°C, and the critical pressure is 73 atm.

Critical conditions for CO2 are quite mild so it tends to exist as a single dense phase in the reservoir. This is GOOD news because it means that (in certain circumstances) there is zero interfacial tension between injected fluid and oil, so you get high displacement efficiency (no trapped oil). But there are lots of other things that can go wrong with a CO2 flood.

Above 31C carbon dioxide cannot exist as a liquid no matter what the pressure is.
tom deplume said

> The easiest way to sequester
> fossil carbon is to not take it
> to the surface in the first place.

Well, by tom's logic the carbon was well contained (as oil or gas in place) before it was produced. So putting it back in the same geological trap should keep it out of harms way long enough to give us some breathing space. The real problem with sequestration is not that it doesn't work. The problem is that it is so capital-intensive and location-specific.