Comparing options for atmospheric greenhouse gas removal

Author(s):  
Pete Smith
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 255-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pete Smith ◽  
Justin Adams ◽  
David J. Beerling ◽  
Tim Beringer ◽  
Katherine V. Calvin ◽  
...  

Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) include afforestation or reforestation (AR), wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration (SCS), biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering (TEW), and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We assess the opportunities and risks associated with these options through the lens of their potential impacts on ecosystem services (Nature's Contributions to People; NCPs) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that all land-based GGR options contribute positively to at least some NCPs and SDGs. Wetland restoration and SCS almost exclusively deliver positive impacts. A few GGR options, such as afforestation, BECCS, and biochar potentially impact negatively some NCPs and SDGs, particularly when implemented at scale, largely through competition for land. For those that present risks or are least understood, more research is required, and demonstration projects need to proceed with caution. For options that present low risks and provide cobenefits, implementation can proceed more rapidly following no-regrets principles.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Hall ◽  
Mark Davis

The grand scale of GGR deployment now necessary to avoid dangerous climate change warrants the use of grand interpretive theories of how the global economy operates. We argue that critical social science should be able to name the global economy as “capitalism”; and instead of speaking about “transforming the global economy” as a necessary precondition for limiting climate change, instead speak about transforming, or even transcending, capitalism. We propose three principles are helpful for critical social science researchers willing to name and analyse the structural features of capitalism and their relation to greenhouse gas removal technology, policy, and governance. These principles are: (1) Greenhouse Gas Removal technologies are likely to emerge within capitalism, which is crisis prone, growth dependent, market expanding, We use a broad Marxist corpus to justify this principle. (2) There are different varieties of capitalism and this will affect the feasibility of different GGR policies and supports in different nations. We draw on varieties of capitalism and comparative political economy literature to justify this principle. (3) Capitalism is more than an economic system, it is ideologically and culturally maintained. Globally-significant issues such as fundamentalism, institutional mistrust, precarity, and populism, cannot be divorced from our thinking about globally significant deployment of greenhouse gas removal technologies. We use a broad Critical Theory body of work to explore the ideational project of maintaining capitalism and its relation to GGR governance and policy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 219-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pete Smith ◽  
Jean‐Francois Soussana ◽  
Denis Angers ◽  
Louis Schipper ◽  
Claire Chenu ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 251-256
Author(s):  
Sang Hack Lee ◽  
Hyung Soo Park ◽  
Young-Jin Kim ◽  
Won Ho Kim ◽  
Jung Jong Sung

2020 ◽  
Vol 162 (4) ◽  
pp. 2411-2428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duncan McLaren

Abstract Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) techniques appear to offer hopes of balancing limited global carbon budgets by removing substantial amounts of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere later this century. This hope rests on an assumption that GGR will largely supplement emissions reduction. The paper reviews the expectations of GGR implied by integrated assessment modelling, categorizes ways in which delivery or promises of GGR might instead deter or delay emissions reduction, and offers a preliminary estimate of the possible extent of three such forms of ‘mitigation deterrence’. Type 1 is described as ‘substitution and failure’: an estimated 50–229 Gt-C (or 70% of expected GGR) may substitute for emissions otherwise reduced, yet may not be delivered (as a result of political, economic or technical shortcomings, or subsequent leakage or diversion of captured carbon into short-term utilization). Type 2, described as ‘rebounds’, encompasses rebounds, multipliers, and side-effects, such as those arising from land-use change, or use of captured CO2 in enhanced oil recovery. A partial estimate suggests that this could add 25–134 Gt-C to unabated emissions. Type 3, described as ‘imagined offsets’, is estimated to affect 17–27% of the emissions reductions required, reducing abatement by a further 182–297 Gt-C. The combined effect of these unanticipated net additions of CO2 to the atmosphere is equivalent to an additional temperature rise of up to 1.4 °C. The paper concludes that such a risk merits further deeper analysis and serious consideration of measures which might limit the occurrence and extent of mitigation deterrence.


2020 ◽  
Vol 244 ◽  
pp. 118896 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Goglio ◽  
A.G. Williams ◽  
N. Balta-Ozkan ◽  
N.R.P. Harris ◽  
P. Williamson ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document