Jump to content

Carbon dioxide removal: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Electrodialytic ocean carbon removal and desalination: doesn't fit here. The idea is not to willy-nilly list any possible fundamental research paper under the sun.
Line 87: Line 87:
[[File:2010- Direct Air Capture - global - International Energy Agency (IEA) - bar chart.svg|thumb|upright=1.5 | The [[International Energy Agency]] reported growth in [[direct air capture]] global operating capacity.<ref name="IEA_202204">{{cite web |title=Direct Air Capture / A key technology for net zero |url=https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/78633715-15c0-44e1-81df-41123c556d57/DirectAirCapture_Akeytechnologyfornetzero.pdf |website=International Energy Agency (IEA) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220410210408/https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/78633715-15c0-44e1-81df-41123c556d57/DirectAirCapture_Akeytechnologyfornetzero.pdf |archive-date=10 April 2022 |page=18 |date=April 2022 |url-status=live }}</ref>]]{{excerpt|Direct air capture|paragraphs=1|file=no}}
[[File:2010- Direct Air Capture - global - International Energy Agency (IEA) - bar chart.svg|thumb|upright=1.5 | The [[International Energy Agency]] reported growth in [[direct air capture]] global operating capacity.<ref name="IEA_202204">{{cite web |title=Direct Air Capture / A key technology for net zero |url=https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/78633715-15c0-44e1-81df-41123c556d57/DirectAirCapture_Akeytechnologyfornetzero.pdf |website=International Energy Agency (IEA) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220410210408/https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/78633715-15c0-44e1-81df-41123c556d57/DirectAirCapture_Akeytechnologyfornetzero.pdf |archive-date=10 April 2022 |page=18 |date=April 2022 |url-status=live }}</ref>]]{{excerpt|Direct air capture|paragraphs=1|file=no}}


=== Others ===
=== Electrodialytic ocean carbon removal and desalination ===
Salt and carbonate can be simultaneously removed from seawater via economical [[electrodialysis]] for simultaneous [[desalination]] and carbon removal.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mustafa |first=Jawad |last2=Al-Marzouqi |first2=Ali H. |last3=Ghasem |first3=Nayef |last4=El-Naas |first4=Muftah H. |last5=Van der Bruggen |first5=Bart |date=February 2023 |title=Electrodialysis process for carbon dioxide capture coupled with salinity reduction: A statistical and quantitative investigation |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366019132 |journal=Desalination |language=en |volume=548 |pages=116263 |doi=10.1016/j.desal.2022.116263}}</ref>


=== Magnesium silicate/oxide in cement ===
==== Magnesium silicate/oxide in cement ====
The replacement of carbonate in cement allows for the potential absorption of carbon dioxide over concrete lifecycle.<ref name=":3" />{{rp|64}} However, lifecycle amounts are not yet fully understood.<ref name=":3" />
The replacement of carbonate in cement allows for the potential absorption of carbon dioxide over concrete lifecycle.<ref name=":3" />{{rp|64}} However, lifecycle amounts are not yet fully understood.<ref name=":3" />


Revision as of 09:10, 15 February 2023

This article is about removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. For technologies that remove carbon dioxide from point sources, see Carbon capture and storage.

Planting trees is a means of carbon dioxide removal.

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR), also known as negative CO2 emissions, is a process in which carbon dioxide gas (CO2) is removed from the atmosphere and durably stored in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products.[1]: 2221  Similarly, greenhouse gas removal (GGR) or negative greenhouse gas emissions is the removal of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the atmosphere by deliberate human activities, i.e., in addition to the removal that would occur via natural carbon cycle or atmospheric chemistry processes.[1]: 2240  In the context of net zero greenhouse gas emissions targets,[2] CDR is increasingly integrated into climate policy, as a new element of mitigation strategies.[3] CDR and GGR methods are also known as negative emissions technologies (NET), and may be cheaper than preventing some agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.[4]

CDR methods includes carbon sequestration methods (for example afforestation, agricultural practices that sequester carbon in soils (carbon farming), enhanced weathering, etc.) and direct air capture when combined with storage.[5][6][7] To assess whether net negative emissions are achieved by a particular process, comprehensive life cycle analysis of the process must be performed.

A 2019 consensus report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) concluded that using existing CDR methods at scales that can be safely and economically deployed, there is potential to remove and sequester up to 10 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year.[4] This would offset greenhouse gas emissions at about a fifth of the rate at which they are being produced.

All emission pathways that limit global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C by the year 2100 assume the use of CDR approaches in combination with emission reductions.[8][9]

Definitions

Part of a series on the
Carbon cycle
By regions
Carbon dioxide
Forms of carbon
Metabolic pathways
Carbon respiration
Carbon pumps
Carbon sequestration
Methane
Biogeochemical
Other

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is defined as:

Anthropogenic activities removing CO2 from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products. It includes existing and potential anthropogenic enhancement of biological or geochemical sinks and direct air capture and storage, but excludes natural CO2 uptake not directly caused by human activities.[1]: 2221 

The same definition is commonly used for "net negative greenhouse gas emissions", "net zero CO2 emissions" and "net zero greenhouse gas emissions".[1][4]

The terminology in this area is still evolving. The term geoengineering (or climate engineering) is sometimes used in the scientific literature for both CDR or SRM (solar radiation management), if the techniques are used at a global scale.[10]: 6–11  The terms geoengineering or climate engineering are no longer used in IPCC reports.[1]

When CDR is framed as a form of "climate engineering", people tend to view it as intrinsically risky.[4][need quotation to verify] In fact, CDR addresses the root cause of climate change and is part of strategies to reduce net emissions and manage risks related to elevated atmospheric CO2 levels.[5][11]

Categories

CDR methods can be placed in different categories that are based on different criteria:[12]: 114 

  • Role in the carbon cycle (land-based biological; ocean-based biological; geochemical; chemical); or
  • Timescale of storage (decades to centuries; centuries to millennia; thousand years or longer)

Concepts using similar terminology

CDR can be confused with carbon capture and storage (CCS), a process in which carbon dioxide is collected from point-sources such as gas-fired power plants, whose smokestacks emit CO2 in a concentrated stream. The CO2 is then compressed and sequestered or utilized.[13] When used to sequester the carbon from a gas-fired power plant, CCS reduces emissions from continued use of the point source, but does not reduce the amount of carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere.

Potential for climate change mitigation

Further information: climate change mitigation

The likely need for CDR (carbon dioxide removal) as an element of climate change mitigation has been publicly expressed by a range of individuals and organizations involved with climate change issues, including IPCC chief Dr. Hoesung Lee,[14] the UNFCCC executive secretary Christiana Figueres,[15] and the World Watch Institute.[16] Institutions with major programs focusing on CDR include the Lenfest Center for Sustainable Energy at the Earth Institute, Columbia University,[17] and the Climate Decision Making Center,[18] an international collaboration operated out of Carnegie-Mellon University's Department of Engineering and Public Policy.

Using CDR in parallel with other efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as deploying renewable energy, is likely to be less expensive and disruptive than using other efforts alone.[4] A 2019 consensus study report by NASEM assessed the potential of all forms of CDR other than ocean fertilization that could be deployed safely and economically using current technologies, and estimated that they could remove up to 10 gigatons of CO2 per year if fully deployed worldwide.[4] This is one-fifth of the 50 gigatons of CO2 emitted per year by human activities.[4] In 2018, all analyzed mitigation pathways that would prevent more than 1.5 °C of warming included CDR measures.[19]

Some mitigation pathways propose achieving higher rates of CDR through massive deployment of one technology, however these pathways assume that hundreds of millions of hectares of cropland are converted to growing biofuel crops.[4] Further research in the areas of direct air capture, geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, and carbon mineralization could potentially yield technological advancements that make higher rates of CDR economically feasible.[4]

Reliance on large-scale deployment of CDR was regarded in 2018 as a "major risk" to achieving the goal of less than 1.5 °C of warming, given the uncertainties in how quickly CDR can be deployed at scale.[19] Strategies for mitigating climate change that rely less on CDR and more on sustainable use of energy carry less of this risk.[19][20] The possibility of large-scale future CDR deployment has been described as a moral hazard, as it could lead to a reduction in near-term efforts to mitigate climate change.[21][4] The 2019 NASEM report concludes:

Any argument to delay mitigation efforts because NETs will provide a backstop drastically misrepresents their current capacities and the likely pace of research progress.[4]

Methods

Overview listing based on technology readiness level

The following is a list of known CDR methods in the order of their technology readiness level. The ones at the top have a high TDR of 8 to 9 (9 being the maximum possible value, meaning the technology is proven), the ones at the bottom have a low TDR of 1 to 2, meaning the technology is not proven or only validated at laboratory scale.[12]: 115 

  1. Afforestation/ reforestation
  2. Soil carbon sequestration in croplands and grasslands
  3. Peatland and coastal wetland restoration
  4. Agroforestry, improved forest management
  5. Biochar
  6. Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)
  7. Enhanced weathering (EW)
  8. ‘Blue carbon management’ in coastal wetlands (restoration of vegetated coastal ecosystems; an ocean-based biological CDR method which encompasses mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass beds)
  9. Ocean fertilisation, ocean alkalinity enhancement

The CDR methods with the greatest potential to contribute to climate change mitigation efforts as per illustrative mitigation pathways are the land-based biological CDR methods (primarily afforestation/reforestation (A/R)) and/or bioenergy with carbon capture  and storage (BECCS). Some of the pathways also include direct air capture and storage (DACCS).[12]: 114  The land-based biological CDR methods can reduce emissions from the sector called "agriculture, forestry and other land use" (AFOLU).

Afforestation, reforestation, and forestry management

See also: Deforestation and climate change and Reforestation

According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature: "Halting the loss and degradation of natural systems and promoting their restoration have the potential to contribute over one-third of the total climate change mitigation scientists say is required by 2030."[22]

Forests are vital for human society, animals and plant species. This is because trees keep air clean, regulate the local climate and provide a habitat for numerous species. Trees and plants convert carbon dioxide back into oxygen, using photosynthesis. They are important for regulating CO2 levels in the air, as they remove and store carbon from the air. Without them, the atmosphere would heat up quickly and destabilise the climate.[23]

Increased use of wood in construction is being considered.[24]

Carbon sequestration on land and in the ocean

This section is an excerpt from Carbon sequestration.[edit]
Geologic and biologic carbon sequestration of excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere emitted by human activities[25]

Carbon sequestration is the process of storing carbon in a carbon pool.[26]: 2248  It plays a crucial role in limiting climate change by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. There are two main types of carbon sequestration: biologic (also called biosequestration) and geologic.[27]

Biologic carbon sequestration is a naturally occurring process as part of the carbon cycle. Humans can enhance it through deliberate actions and use of technology. Carbon dioxide (CO
2) is naturally captured from the atmosphere through biological, chemical, and physical processes. These processes can be accelerated for example through changes in land use and agricultural practices, called carbon farming. Artificial processes have also been devised to produce similar effects. This approach is called carbon capture and storage. It involves using technology to capture and sequester (store) CO
2 that is produced from human activities underground or under the sea bed.

Plants, such as forests and kelp beds, absorb carbon dioxide from the air as they grow, and bind it into biomass. However, these biological stores may be temporary carbon sinks, as long-term sequestration cannot be guaranteed. Wildfires, disease, economic pressures, and changing political priorities may release the sequestered carbon back into the atmosphere.[28]

Carbon dioxide that has been removed from the atmosphere can also be stored in the Earth's crust by injecting it underground, or in the form of insoluble carbonate salts. The latter process is called mineral sequestration. These methods are considered non-volatile because they not only remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere but also sequester it indefinitely. This means the carbon is "locked away" for thousands to millions of years.

To enhance carbon sequestration processes in oceans the following technologies have been proposed: seaweed farming, ocean fertilization, artificial upwelling, basalt storage, mineralization and deep-sea sediments, and adding bases to neutralize acids.[29] However, none have achieved large scale application so far.

Agricultural practices

This section is an excerpt from Carbon farming.[edit]
Measuring soil respiration on agricultural land. Carbon farming enhances carbon sequestration in the soil.

Carbon farming is a set of agricultural methods that aim to store carbon in the soil, crop roots, wood and leaves. The technical term for this is carbon sequestration. The overall goal of carbon farming is to create a net loss of carbon from the atmosphere.[30] This is done by increasing the rate at which carbon is sequestered into soil and plant material. One option is to increase the soil's organic matter content. This can also aid plant growth, improve soil water retention capacity[31] and reduce fertilizer use.[32] Sustainable forest management is another tool that is used in carbon farming.[33] Carbon farming is one component of climate-smart agriculture. It is also one way to remove carbon dioxide from the atmisphere.

Agricultural methods for carbon farming include adjusting how tillage and livestock grazing is done, using organic mulch or compost, working with biochar and terra preta, and changing the crop types. Methods used in forestry include reforestation and bamboo farming.

Carbon farming methods might have additional costs. Some countries have government policies that give financial incentives to farmers to use carbon farming methods.[34] As of 2016, variants of carbon farming reached hundreds of millions of hectares globally, of the nearly 5 billion hectares (1.2×1010 acres) of world farmland.[35] Carbon farming is not without its challenges or disadvantages. This is because some of its methods can affect ecosystem services. For example, carbon farming could cause an increase of land clearing, monocultures and biodiversity loss.[36] It is important to maximize environmental benefits of carbon farming by keeping in mind ecosystem services at the same time.[36]

Biochar

Main article: Biochar

Biochar is created by the pyrolysis of biomass, and is under investigation as a method of carbon sequestration. Biochar is a charcoal that is used for agricultural purposes which also aids in carbon sequestration, the capture or hold of carbon. It is created using a process called pyrolysis, which is basically the act of high temperature heating biomass in an environment with low oxygen levels. What remains is a material known as char, similar to charcoal but is made through a sustainable process, thus the use of biomass.[37] Biomass is organic matter produced by living organisms or recently living organisms, most commonly plants or plant based material.[38] A study done by the UK Biochar Research Center has stated that, on a conservative level, biochar can store 1 gigaton of carbon per year. With greater effort in marketing and acceptance of biochar, the benefit could be the storage of 5–9 gigatons per year of carbon in biochar soils.[39][better source needed]

Direct air capture with carbon sequestration

The International Energy Agency reported growth in direct air capture global operating capacity.[40]
This section is an excerpt from Direct air capture.[edit]
Direct air capture (DAC) is the use of chemical or physical processes to extract carbon dioxide directly from the ambient air.[41] If the extracted CO2 is then sequestered in safe long-term storage (called direct air carbon capture and sequestration (DACCS)), the overall process will achieve carbon dioxide removal and be a "negative emissions technology" (NET).

Others

Magnesium silicate/oxide in cement

The replacement of carbonate in cement allows for the potential absorption of carbon dioxide over concrete lifecycle.[24]: 64  However, lifecycle amounts are not yet fully understood.[24]

Issues

Economic issues

Further information: Economics of climate change mitigation and Economics of climate change

The cost of CDR differs substantially depending on the maturity of the technology employed as well as the economics of both voluntary carbon removal markets and the physical output; for example, the pyrolysis of biomass produces biochar that has various commercial applications, including soil regeneration and wastewater treatment.[42] In 2021 DAC cost from $250 to $600 per ton, compared to $100 for biochar and less than $50 for nature-based solutions, such as reforestation and afforestation.[43][44] The fact that biochar commands a higher price in the carbon removal market than nature-based solutions reflects the fact that it is a more durable sink with carbon being sequestered for hundreds or even thousands of years while nature-based solutions represent a more volatile form of storage, which risks related to forest fires, pests, economic pressures and changing political priorities.[45] The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting states that to be compatible with the Paris Agreement: "...organizations must commit to gradually increase the percentage of carbon removal offsets they procure with the view of exclusively sourcing carbon removals by mid-century."[46] These initiatives along with the development of new industry standards for engineered carbon removal, such as the Puro Standard, will help to support the growth of the carbon removal market.[47]

Forests can be used to create carbon credits,[48] often involving the use of geospatial analytical systems to calculate carbon offsets by conserving a forest area or a reforestation initiative. REDD+ is an example of a carbon credit initiative. Individuals and businesses can purchase carbon credits through verified retailers such as ACT4.

In 2021, businessman Elon Musk announced he was donating $100m for a prize for best carbon capture technology.[49]

Although CDR is not covered by the EU Allowance as of 2021, the European Commission is preparing for carbon removal certification and considering carbon contracts for difference.[50][51] CDR might also in future be added to the UK Emissions Trading Scheme.[24] As of end 2021 carbon prices for both these cap-and-trade schemes currently based on carbon reductions, as opposed to carbon removals, remained below $100.[52][53]

In April 2022, a private sector alliance led by Stripe with prominent members including Meta, Google and Shopify, revealed a nearly $1 billion dollar fund to reward companies able to permanently capture & store carbon. According to senior Stripe employee Nan Ransohoff, the new fund "is roughly 30 times the carbon-removal market that existed in 2021. But it’s still 1,000 times short of the market we need by 2050."[54]

According to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, some of these "negative-emission technologies" are already being used on a large scale. Congress passed the 45Q tax, which gives companies a $50 credit for every ton of carbon dioxide they fix and store. So the study proposes some CO2 fixation technologies that cost between $20 and $100 per ton.

Removal of other greenhouse gases

Although some researchers have suggested methods for removing methane, others say that nitrous oxide would be a better subject for research due to its longer lifetime in the atmosphere.[55]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e IPCC, 2021: Annex VII: Glossary [Matthews, J.B.R., V. Möller, R. van Diemen, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C.  Méndez, S. Semenov, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2215–2256, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.022.
  2. ^ Geden, Oliver (May 2016). "An actionable climate target". Nature Geoscience. 9 (5): 340–342. Bibcode:2016NatGe...9..340G. doi:10.1038/ngeo2699. ISSN 1752-0908. Archived from the original on May 25, 2021. Retrieved March 7, 2021.
  3. ^ Schenuit, Felix; Colvin, Rebecca; Fridahl, Mathias; McMullin, Barry; Reisinger, Andy; Sanchez, Daniel L.; Smith, Stephen M.; Torvanger, Asbjørn; Wreford, Anita; Geden, Oliver (March 4, 2021). "Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases". Frontiers in Climate. 3: 638805. doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.638805. ISSN 2624-9553.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k National Academies of Sciences, Engineering (October 24, 2018). Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda. ISBN 978-0-309-48452-7. Archived from the original on November 20, 2021. Retrieved February 22, 2020. {{cite book}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; November 22, 2021 suggested (help)
  5. ^ a b "Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty". The Royal Society. 2009. Archived from the original on October 23, 2019. Retrieved September 10, 2011.
  6. ^ Vergragt, P.J.; Markusson, N.; Karlsson, H. (2011). "Carbon capture and storage, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, and the escape from the fossil-fuel lock-in". Global Environmental Change. 21 (2): 282–92. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.020.
  7. ^ Azar, C.; Lindgren, K.; Larson, E.; Möllersten, K. (2006). "Carbon Capture and Storage from Fossil Fuels and Biomass – Costs and Potential Role in Stabilizing the Atmosphere". Climatic Change. 74 (1–3): 47–79. Bibcode:2006ClCh...74...47A. doi:10.1007/s10584-005-3484-7. S2CID 4850415.
  8. ^ Page 4-81, IPCC Sixth Assessment Report Working Group 1, 9/8/21, https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/ Archived August 11, 2021, at the Wayback Machine
  9. ^ IPCC15, Ch 2.
  10. ^ IPCC (2022) Chapter 1: Introduction and Framing in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
  11. ^ Obersteiner, M.; Azar, Ch; Kauppi, P.; Möllersten, K.; Moreira, J.; Nilsson, S.; Read, P.; Riahi, K.; Schlamadinger, B.; Yamagata, Y.; Yan, J. (October 26, 2001). "Managing Climate Risk". Science. 294 (5543): 786–787. doi:10.1126/science.294.5543.786b. PMID 11681318. S2CID 34722068.
  12. ^ a b c M. Pathak, R. Slade, P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Pichs-Madruga, D. Ürge-Vorsatz,2022: Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926.002.
  13. ^ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "Glossary — Global Warming of 1.5 ºC". Archived from the original on December 22, 2019. Retrieved February 23, 2020.
  14. ^ Pidcock, Roz (September 15, 2015). "The Carbon Brief Interview: Dr Hoesung Lee". Carbon Brief. Retrieved May 19, 2022.
  15. ^ Harvey, Fiona (June 5, 2011). "Global warming crisis may mean world has to suck greenhouse gases from air". Guardian Online. Archived from the original on November 6, 2018. Retrieved September 10, 2011.
  16. ^ Hollo, Tim (January 15, 2009). "Negative emissions needed for a safe climate". Archived from the original on December 15, 2019. Retrieved September 10, 2011.
  17. ^ "National Geographic Magazine - NGM.com". Ngm.nationalgeographic.com. April 25, 2013. Archived from the original on March 22, 2018. Retrieved September 22, 2013.
  18. ^ "Snatching Carbon Dioxide from the Atmosphere" (PDF). Cdmc.epp.cmu.edu. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 28, 2013. Retrieved September 22, 2013.
  19. ^ a b c "SR15 Technical Summary" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December 20, 2019. Retrieved July 25, 2019.
  20. ^ Anderson, K.; Peters, G. (October 14, 2016). "The trouble with negative emissions". Science. 354 (6309): 182–183. Bibcode:2016Sci...354..182A. doi:10.1126/science.aah4567. hdl:11250/2491451. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 27738161. S2CID 44896189. Archived from the original on November 22, 2021. Retrieved April 28, 2020.
  21. ^ IPCC15, Ch. 2 p. 124.
  22. ^ "Forests and climate change". IUCN. November 11, 2017. Archived from the original on October 9, 2020. Retrieved October 7, 2020.
  23. ^ "Forest Protection & Climate Change: Why Is It Important?". Climate Transform. May 13, 2021. Archived from the original on June 3, 2021. Retrieved May 31, 2021.
  24. ^ a b c d "Greenhouse Gas Removals: Summary of Responses to the Call for Evidence" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 20, 2021.
  25. ^ "CCS Explained". UKCCSRC. Archived from the original on June 28, 2020. Retrieved June 27, 2020.
  26. ^ IPCC (2021). Masson-Delmotte, V.; Zhai, P.; Pirani, A.; Connors, S. L.; et al. (eds.). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (PDF). Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press (In Press). Archived (PDF) from the original on June 5, 2022. Retrieved June 3, 2022.
  27. ^ "What is carbon sequestration? | U.S. Geological Survey". www.usgs.gov. Archived from the original on February 6, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023.
  28. ^ Myles, Allen (September 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 2, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  29. ^ Renforth, Phil; Henderson, Gideon (June 15, 2017). "Assessing ocean alkalinity for carbon sequestration". Reviews of Geophysics. 55 (3): 636–674. Bibcode:2017RvGeo..55..636R. doi:10.1002/2016RG000533. S2CID 53985208. Retrieved March 3, 2024.
  30. ^ Nath, Arun Jyoti; Lal, Rattan; Das, Ashesh Kumar (January 1, 2015). "Managing woody bamboos for carbon farming and carbon trading". Global Ecology and Conservation. 3: 654–663. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2015.03.002. ISSN 2351-9894.
  31. ^ "Carbon Farming | Carbon Cycle Institute". www.carboncycle.org. Archived from the original on May 21, 2021. Retrieved April 27, 2018.
  32. ^ Almaraz, Maya; Wong, Michelle Y.; Geoghegan, Emily K.; Houlton, Benjamin Z. (2021). "A review of carbon farming impacts on nitrogen cycling, retention, and loss". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1505 (1): 102–117. doi:10.1111/nyas.14690. ISSN 0077-8923. S2CID 238202676.
  33. ^ Jindal, Rohit; Swallow, Brent; Kerr, John (2008). "Forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in Africa: Potential benefits and challenges". Natural Resources Forum. 32 (2): 116–130. doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.2008.00176.x. ISSN 1477-8947.
  34. ^ Tang, Kai; Kragt, Marit E.; Hailu, Atakelty; Ma, Chunbo (May 1, 2016). "Carbon farming economics: What have we learned?". Journal of Environmental Management. 172: 49–57. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.008. ISSN 0301-4797. PMID 26921565.
  35. ^ Burton, David. "How carbon farming can help solve climate change". The Conversation. Retrieved April 27, 2018.
  36. ^ a b Lin, Brenda B.; Macfadyen, Sarina; Renwick, Anna R.; Cunningham, Saul A.; Schellhorn, Nancy A. (October 1, 2013). "Maximizing the Environmental Benefits of Carbon Farming through Ecosystem Service Delivery". BioScience. 63 (10): 793–803. doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.10.6. ISSN 0006-3568.
  37. ^ "What is biochar?". UK Biochar research center. University of Edinburgh Kings Buildings Edinburgh. Archived from the original on October 1, 2019. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  38. ^ "What is Biomass?". Biomass Energy Center. Direct.gov.uk. Archived from the original on October 3, 2016. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  39. ^ "Biochar reducing and removing CO2 while improving soils: A significant sustainable response to climate change" (PDF). UKBRC. UK Biochar research Center. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 5, 2016. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  40. ^ "Direct Air Capture / A key technology for net zero" (PDF). International Energy Agency (IEA). April 2022. p. 18. Archived (PDF) from the original on April 10, 2022.
  41. ^ European Commission. Directorate General for Research and Innovation; European Commission's Group of Chief Scientific Advisors (2018). Novel carbon capture and utilisation technologies. Publications Office. doi:10.2777/01532.[page needed]
  42. ^ "How Finland's Puro.earth plans to scale up carbon removal to help the world reach net zero emissions". European CEO. July 1, 2021. Archived from the original on July 1, 2021.
  43. ^ Lebling, Katie; McQueen, Noah; Pisciotta, Max; Wilcox, Jennifer (January 6, 2021). "Direct Air Capture: Resource Considerations and Costs for Carbon Removal". Archived from the original on May 13, 2021. Retrieved May 13, 2021. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  44. ^ Brown, James (February 21, 2021). "New Biochar technology a game changer for carbon capture market". The Land. Archived from the original on February 21, 2021. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  45. ^ Myles, Allen (February 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 2, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  46. ^ Myles, Allen (September 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 2, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  47. ^ Giles, Jim (February 10, 2020). "Carbon markets get real on removal". Archived from the original on February 15, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  48. ^ "Carbon Calculation | Certified Carbon Credits". www.act4.io. Retrieved June 3, 2022.
  49. ^ @elonmusk (January 21, 2021). "Am donating $100M towards a prize for best carbon capture technology" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  50. ^ Tamme, Eve; Beck, Larissa Lee (2021). "European Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy: Current Status and Future Opportunities". Frontiers in Climate. 3: 120. doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.682882. ISSN 2624-9553.
  51. ^ Elkerbout, Milan; Bryhn, Julie. "Setting the context for an EU policy framework for negative emissions" (PDF). Centre for European Policy Studies. Archived (PDF) from the original on December 10, 2021.
  52. ^ Evans, Michael (December 8, 2021). "Spotlight: EU carbon price strengthens to record highs in November". www.spglobal.com. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  53. ^ "Pricing Carbon". The World Bank. Archived from the original on June 2, 2014. Retrieved December 20, 2021.
  54. ^ Robinson Meyer (April 23, 2022). "We've Never Seen a Carbon-Removal Plan Like This Before". The Atlantic. Retrieved April 29, 2022.
  55. ^ Lackner, Klaus S. (2020). "Practical constraints on atmospheric methane removal". Nature Sustainability. 3 (5): 357. doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0496-7. ISSN 2398-9629.

Sources

  • IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.)].
  • Fajardy, Mathilde; Köberle, Alexandre; Mac Dowell, Niall; Fantuzzi, Andrea (2019). "BECCS deployment: a reality check" (PDF). Grantham Institute Imperial College London.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Carbon dioxide removal.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carbon_dioxide_removal&oldid=1139472276"