Towards net zero CO2 emissions without relying on massive carbon dioxide removal

Mitigation of global warming requires an understanding of where energy is produced and consumed, the magnitude of carbon dioxide generation, and proper understanding of the Carbon Cycle. The latter leads to the distinction between and need for both CO2 and biomass CARBON sequestration. Short reviews are provided for prior technologies proposed for reducing CO2 emissions from fossil fuels or substituting renewable energy, focusing on their limitations. None offer a complete solution. Of these, CO2 sequestration is poised to have the largest impact. We know how to do it. It will just cost money, and scale-up is a huge challenge. Few projects have been brought forward to semi-commercial scale. Transportation accounts for only about 30% of U.S. overall energy demand. Biofuels penetration remains small, and thus, they contribute a trivial amount of overall CO2 reduction, even though 40% of U.S. corn and 30% of soybeans are devoted to their production. Bioethanol is traced through its Carbon Cycle and shown to be both energy inefficient, and an inefficient use of biomass carbon. Both biofuels and CO2 sequestration reduce FUTURE CO2 emissions from continued use of fossil fuels. They will not remove CO2 ALREADY in the atmosphere. The only way to do that is to break the Carbon Cycle by growing biomass from atmospheric CO2 and sequestering biomass CARBON. Theoretically, sequestration of only a fraction of the world’s tree leaves, which are renewed every year, can get the world to Net Zero CO2 without disturbing the underlying forests.

Download Full-text

Achieving Net Zero Carbon Dioxide by Sequestering Biomass Carbon

10.20944/preprints202007.0576.v3 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jeffrey Amelse

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Cycle ◽

Co2 Emissions ◽

Fossil Fuels ◽

Complete Solution ◽

Biomass Carbon ◽

Natural Form ◽

Net Zero ◽

The World ◽

Zero Carbon

Many corporations aspire to become Net Zero Carbon Dioxide by 2030-2050. This paper examines what it will take. It requires understanding where energy is produced and consumed, the magnitude of CO2 generation, and the Carbon Cycle. Reviews are provided for prior technologies for reducing CO2 emissions from fossil to focus on their limitations and to show that none offer a complete solution. Both biofuels and CO2 sequestration reduce future CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. They will not remove CO2 already in the atmosphere. Planting trees has been proposed as one solution. Trees are a temporary solution. When they die, they decompose and release their carbon as CO2 to the atmosphere. The only way to permanently remove CO2 already in the atmosphere is to break the Carbon Cycle by growing biomass from atmospheric CO2 and sequestering biomass carbon. Permanent sequestration of leaves is proposed as a solution. Leaves have a short Carbon Cycle time constant. They renew and decompose every year. Theoretically, sequestrating a fraction of the world’s tree leaves can get the world to Net Zero without disturbing the underlying forests. This would be CO2 capture in its simplest and most natural form. Permanent sequestration may be achieved by redesigning landfills to discourage decomposition. In traditional landfills, waste undergoes several stages of decomposition, including rapid initial aerobic decomposition to CO2, followed by slow anaerobic decomposition to methane and CO2. The latter can take hundreds to thousands of years. Understanding landfill chemistry provides clues to disrupting decomposition at each phase.

Download Full-text

Towards Achieving Net Zero Carbon Dioxide by Sequestering Biomass Carbon

10.20944/preprints202007.0576.v4 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jeffrey Amelse

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Cycle ◽

Co2 Emissions ◽

Fossil Fuels ◽

Complete Solution ◽

Biomass Carbon ◽

Natural Form ◽

Net Zero ◽

The World ◽

Zero Carbon

Many corporations aspire to become Net Zero Carbon Dioxide by 2030-2050. This paper examines what it will take. It requires understanding where energy is produced and consumed, the magnitude of CO2 generation, and the Carbon Cycle. Reviews are provided for prior technologies for reducing CO2 emissions from fossil to focus on their limitations and to show that none offer a complete solution. Both biofuels and CO2 sequestration reduce future CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. They will not remove CO2 already in the atmosphere. Planting trees has been proposed as one solution. Trees are a temporary solution. When they die, they decompose and release their carbon as CO2 to the atmosphere. The only way to permanently remove CO2 already in the atmosphere is to break the Carbon Cycle by growing biomass from atmospheric CO2 and sequestering biomass carbon. Permanent sequestration of leaves is proposed as a solution. Leaves have a short Carbon Cycle time constant. They renew and decompose every year. Theoretically, sequestrating a fraction of the world’s tree leaves can get the world to Net Zero without disturbing the underlying forests. This would be CO2 capture in its simplest and most natural form. Permanent sequestration may be achieved by redesigning landfills to discourage decomposition. In traditional landfills, waste undergoes several stages of decomposition, including rapid initial aerobic decomposition to CO2, followed by slow anaerobic decomposition to methane and CO2. The latter can take hundreds to thousands of years. Understanding landfill chemistry provides clues to disrupting decomposition at each phase.

Download Full-text

Moving toward Net-Zero Emissions Requires New Alliances for Carbon Dioxide Removal

One Earth ◽

10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.002 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 145-149

Author(s):

Sabine Fuss ◽

Josep G. Canadell ◽

Philippe Ciais ◽

Robert B. Jackson ◽

Chris D. Jones ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Net Zero

Download Full-text

Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.638805 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Felix Schenuit ◽

Rebecca Colvin ◽

Mathias Fridahl ◽

Barry McMullin ◽

Andy Reisinger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Case Studies ◽

National Policy ◽

Analytical Framework ◽

The United States ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

The European Union ◽

Early Integration ◽

Fine Grained ◽

Net Zero

Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets. The scientific literature on CDR governance and policy is still rather scarce, with empirical case studies and comparisons largely missing. Based on an analytical framework that draws on the multi-level perspective of sociotechnical transitions as well as existing work on CDR governance, we gathered and assessed empirical material until early 2021 from 9 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) cases: the European Union and three of its Member States (Ireland, Germany, and Sweden), Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Based on a synthesis of differences and commonalities, we propose a tripartite conceptual typology of the varieties of CDR policymaking: (1) incremental modification of existing national policy mixes, (2) early integration of CDR policy that treats emission reductions and removals as fungible, and (3) proactive CDR policy entrepreneurship with support for niche development. Although these types do not necessarily cover all dimensions relevant for CDR policy and are based on a limited set of cases, the conceptual typology might spur future comparative work as well as more fine-grained case-studies on established and emerging CDR policies.

Download Full-text

Governing Carbon Dioxide Removal in the UK: Lessons Learned and Challenges Ahead

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.673859 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Javier Lezaun ◽

Peter Healey ◽

Tim Kruger ◽

Stephen M. Smith

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Climate Change Mitigation ◽

Public Support ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Net Zero ◽

The One ◽

The Uk ◽

Public Views ◽

Change Mitigation

This Policy Brief reviews the experience of the UK in developing principles for the governance of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) at scale. Early discussions on CDR governance took place in two separate and somewhat disjointed policy domains: forestry, on the one hand, and R&D support for novel “geoengineering” technologies, on the other. The adoption by the UK government of a 2050 “net zero” target is forcing an integration of these disparate perspectives, and should lead to a more explicit articulation of the role CDR is expected to play in UK climate strategy. This need for clarification is revealing some of underlying tensions and divisions in public views on CDR, particularly when it comes to forms of capture and sequestration deemed to be “non-natural.” We propose some principles to ensure that the development and deployment of carbon dioxide removal at scale strengthens a commitment to ambitious climate change mitigation and can thus enjoy broad public support.

Download Full-text

Evaluating the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potential of large-scale aff-/reforestation and improved forest management in Norway

10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-6827 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ryan Bright ◽

Micky Allen ◽

Clara Anton-Fernandez ◽

Lise Dalsgaard ◽

Stephanie Eisner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Forest Management ◽

Growth Rates ◽

Large Scale ◽

Surface Albedo ◽

Forest Growth ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Terrestrial Carbon ◽

Global Mean Temperature ◽

Net Zero

As a carbon dioxide removal measure, the Norwegian government is currently considering a policy of large-scale planting of spruce (Picea abies (L) H. Karst) on non-forested lands (i.e., aff-/reforestation) and secondary forested lands dominated by early successional broadleaved tree species (i.e., improved forest management).&#160; Given the need to achieve net zero emissions in the latter half of the 21st century in effort to limit the global mean temperature rise to &#8220;well below&#8221; 2 &#176;C, the mitigation potential of such a policy is unclear given relatively slow tree growth rates in the region.&#160; Further convoluting the picture is the magnitude and relevance of surface albedo changes linked to such projects, which typically counter the benefits of an enhanced forest CO2 sink in high latitude regions.&#160; Here, we carry out a rigorous empirical assessment of the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potential of large-scale aff-/reforestation (AR) and improved forest management (IFM) projects in Norway, taking into account transient developments in both terrestrial carbon sinks and surface albedo over the 21st century and beyond.&#160; We find that surface albedo changes would likely play a negligible role in counteracting the carbon cycle benefit of tCDR, yet given slow forest growth rates in the region, meaningful tCDR benefits from AR and IFM projects would not be realized until the end of the 21st century, with maximum benefits occurring around 2150.&#160; We estimate Norway&#8217;s total accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 and 2150 (including surface albedo changes) to be 447 (&#177; 240) and 852 (&#177; 295) Mt CO2-eq. at mean costs of US$ 29 (&#177; 18) and US$ 26 (&#177; 14) per ton CDR, respectively.&#160; For perspective, the accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 represents around 8 years of Norway&#8217;s total current annual production-based (i.e., territorial) CO2-eq. emissions.

Download Full-text

Achieving Net Zero Carbon Dioxide by Sequestering Biomass Carbon

10.20944/preprints202007.0576.v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jeffrey Amelse

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Cycle ◽

Co2 Emissions ◽

Energy Demand ◽

Co2 Sequestration ◽

Fossil Fuels ◽

Scale Up ◽

Biomass Carbon ◽

Net Zero ◽

The World

Mitigation of global warming requires an understanding of where energy is produced and consumed, the magnitude of carbon dioxide generation, and proper understanding of the Carbon Cycle. The latter leads to the distinction between and need for both CO2 and biomass CARBON sequestration. Short reviews are provided for prior technologies proposed for reducing CO2 emissions from fossil fuels or substituting renewable energy, focusing on their limitations. None offer a complete solution. Of these, CO2 sequestration is poised to have the largest impact. We know how to do it. It will just cost money, and scale-up is a huge challenge. Few projects have been brought forward to semi-commercial scale. Transportation accounts for only about 30% of U.S. overall energy demand. Biofuels penetration remains small, and thus, they contribute a trivial amount of overall CO2 reduction, even though 40% of U.S. corn and 30% of soybeans are devoted to their production. Bioethanol is traced through its Carbon Cycle and shown to be both energy inefficient, and an inefficient use of biomass carbon. Both biofuels and CO2 sequestration reduce FUTURE CO2 emissions from continued use of fossil fuels. They will not remove CO2 ALREADY in the atmosphere. The only way to do that is to break the Carbon Cycle by growing biomass from atmospheric CO2 and sequestering biomass CARBON. Theoretically, sequestration of only a fraction of the world’s tree leaves, which are renewed every year, can get the world to Net Zero CO2 without disturbing the underlying forests. Thoughts are put forth on how to achieve secure permanent biomass sequestration.

Download Full-text

Who Is Paying for Carbon Dioxide Removal? Designing Policy Instruments for Mobilizing Negative Emissions Technologies

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.672996 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Matthias Honegger ◽

Matthias Poralla ◽

Axel Michaelowa ◽

Hanna-Mari Ahonen

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Policy Instruments ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Policy And Practice ◽

Public And Private ◽

Course Of Action ◽

Net Zero ◽

Practice Review ◽

Policy Challenge

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) poses a significant and complex public policy challenge in the long-term. Presently treated as a marginal aspect of climate policy, addressing CDR as a public good is quickly becoming essential for limiting warming to well below 2 or 1.5°C by achieving net-zero emissions in time – including by mobilization of public and private finance. In this policy and practice review, we develop six functions jointly needed for policy mixes mobilizing CDR in a manner compatible with the Paris Agreement's objectives. We discuss the emerging CDR financing efforts in light of these functions, and we chart a path to a meaningful long-term structuring of policies and financing instruments. CDR characteristics point to the need for up-front capital, continuous funding for scaling, and long-term operating funding streams, as well as differentiation based on permanence of storage and should influence the design of policy instruments. Transparency and early public deliberation are essential for charting a politically stable course of action on CDR, while specific policy designs are being developed in a way that ensures effectiveness, prevents rent-seeking at public expense, and allows for iterative course corrections. We propose a stepwise approach whereby various CDR approaches initially need differentiated treatment based on their differing maturity and cost through R&D pilot activity subsidies. In the longer term, CDR increasingly ought to be funded through mitigation results-oriented financing and included in broader policy instruments. We conclude that CDR needs to become a regularly-provided public service like public waste management has become over the last century.

Download Full-text