The Fort Worth Press - Carbon capture: how does CO2 removal work?

USD -
AED 3.6731
AFN 64.000125
ALL 83.310487
AMD 377.390171
ANG 1.790083
AOA 917.000032
ARS 1394.6999
AUD 1.411961
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.698169
BAM 1.696352
BBD 2.017025
BDT 122.885307
BGN 1.709309
BHD 0.377557
BIF 2970
BMD 1
BND 1.278723
BOB 6.920298
BRL 5.205304
BSD 1.001487
BTN 92.872847
BWP 13.580798
BYN 3.052406
BYR 19600
BZD 2.014155
CAD 1.370005
CDF 2269.999753
CHF 0.78972
CLF 0.02318
CLP 915.279629
CNY 6.87305
CNH 6.88653
COP 3706.7
CRC 467.742425
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 97.049978
CZK 21.225097
DJF 177.7205
DKK 6.4883
DOP 60.050274
DZD 132.416153
EGP 52.253496
ERN 15
ETB 156.999833
EUR 0.86831
FJD 2.21245
FKP 0.749449
GBP 0.74957
GEL 2.714976
GGP 0.749449
GHS 10.905026
GIP 0.749449
GMD 73.999838
GNF 8779.99989
GTQ 7.671558
GYD 209.520258
HKD 7.83815
HNL 26.569497
HRK 6.543203
HTG 131.24607
HUF 340.140278
IDR 16961
ILS 3.10005
IMP 0.749449
INR 92.88435
IQD 1310
IRR 1315000.000238
ISK 124.370104
JEP 0.749449
JMD 157.249479
JOD 0.708995
JPY 159.335997
KES 129.549986
KGS 87.449829
KHR 4009.999882
KMF 427.999727
KPW 899.9784
KRW 1501.410171
KWD 0.30644
KYD 0.834501
KZT 483.111229
LAK 21449.999713
LBP 89550.000042
LKR 311.844884
LRD 183.349753
LSL 16.820103
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.380061
MAD 9.37375
MDL 17.460159
MGA 4169.999712
MKD 53.541262
MMK 2100.10344
MNT 3571.101739
MOP 8.084959
MRU 40.11989
MUR 46.510272
MVR 15.459872
MWK 1736.000271
MXN 17.707895
MYR 3.915496
MZN 63.900902
NAD 16.819834
NGN 1356.939807
NIO 36.720274
NOK 9.56654
NPR 148.591748
NZD 1.71111
OMR 0.384495
PAB 1.001483
PEN 3.427502
PGK 4.30275
PHP 59.782501
PKR 279.290359
PLN 3.70598
PYG 6472.539624
QAR 3.644007
RON 4.421402
RSD 101.991987
RUB 83.889591
RWF 1459
SAR 3.754945
SBD 8.04524
SCR 14.089128
SDG 600.999851
SEK 9.332675
SGD 1.279575
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.650411
SLL 20969.510825
SOS 571.499098
SRD 37.374981
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.5
SVC 8.762663
SYP 110.58576
SZL 16.820092
THB 32.617011
TJS 9.578717
TMT 3.5
TND 2.917506
TOP 2.40776
TRY 44.202397
TTD 6.788466
TWD 31.932498
TZS 2603.729567
UAH 44.042968
UGX 3767.67725
UYU 40.557008
UZS 12175.000113
VES 450.942841
VND 26310
VUV 119.592862
WST 2.733704
XAF 568.900934
XAG 0.013003
XAU 0.000205
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.80488
XDR 0.70688
XOF 566.5008
XPF 103.914716
YER 238.575025
ZAR 16.80645
ZMK 9001.203552
ZMW 19.583865
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.1000

    82.5

    +0.12%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0800

    16.7

    -0.48%

  • CMSC

    -0.1000

    22.85

    -0.44%

  • NGG

    -2.4450

    87.975

    -2.78%

  • BTI

    -2.1300

    58.42

    -3.65%

  • RIO

    -1.3800

    88.42

    -1.56%

  • RELX

    -0.1050

    34.185

    -0.31%

  • GSK

    -1.0300

    52.38

    -1.97%

  • BCE

    -0.2150

    25.795

    -0.83%

  • AZN

    -1.5300

    189.76

    -0.81%

  • CMSD

    -0.0800

    22.8

    -0.35%

  • BCC

    -0.2550

    72.665

    -0.35%

  • BP

    0.5900

    44.44

    +1.33%

  • JRI

    -0.0800

    12.38

    -0.65%

  • VOD

    -0.2600

    14.49

    -1.79%

Carbon capture: how does CO2 removal work?
Carbon capture: how does CO2 removal work? / Photo: © AFP/File

Carbon capture: how does CO2 removal work?

With global temperatures still on the rise, even the most sceptical of scientists agree that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is crucial to meet the Paris Agreement goal of capping global warming below two degrees Celsius.

Text size:

A new global assessment published Thursday says limiting global warming at liveable levels will be impossible without massively scaling up CDR.

But even the most ardent promoters of carbon removal technology insist that slashing emissions remains the primary objective, even if the continued failure to do so has pushed CDR sharply higher on the climate agenda.

Methods range from conventional techniques like restoring or expanding CO2-absorbing forests and wetlands, to more novel technologies such as direct air capture.

Here AFP explains the essentials on CO2 removal:

- What is CO2 removal? -

There are basically two ways to extract CO2 from thin air.

One is to boost nature's capacity to absorb and stockpile carbon. Healing degraded forests, restoring mangroves, industrial-scale tree planting, boosting carbon uptake in rocks or the ocean -- all fall under the hotly debated category of "nature-based solutions".

The second way -- called direct air capture -- uses chemical processes to strip out CO2, then recycles it for industrial use or locks it away in porous rock formations, unused coal beds or saline aquifers.

A variation known as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, or BECCS, combines elements from both approaches.

Wood pellets or other biomass is converted into biofuels or burned to drive turbines that generate electricity. The CO2 emitted is roughly cancelled out by the CO2 absorbed during plant growth.

But when carbon dioxide in the power plant's exhaust is syphoned off and stored underground, the process becomes a net-negative technology.

- Do we really need it? -

Yes, for a couple of reasons.

Even if the world begins drawing down carbon pollution by three, four or five percent each year -- and that is a significant "if" -- some sectors like cement and steel production, long-haul aviation and agriculture are expected to maintain significant emission levels for decades.

The first-ever State of Carbon Dioxide report concluded that CDR must extract between 450 billion and 1.1 trillion tonnes of CO2 over the remainder of the 21st century -- the equivalent of 10 to 30 times annual CO2 emissions today.

And there is another reason.

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) makes it alarmingly clear that the 1.5C threshold will be breached in the coming decades no matter how aggressively greenhouse gases are drawn down.

CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for centuries, which means that the only way to bring Earth's average surface temperature back under the wire by 2100 is to suck some of it out of the air.

- What's hot, what's not? -

BECCS was pencilled into IPCC climate models more than a decade ago as the theoretically cheapest form of negative emissions, but has barely developed since.

A peer-reviewed proposal in 2019 to draw down excess CO2 by planting a trillion trees sparked huge excitement in the media and among gas and oil companies that have made afforestation offsets a central to their efforts to align with Paris treaty goals.

But the idea was sharply criticised by experts, who pointed out that it would require converting twice the area of India into mono-culture tree farms.

"I don't see a BECCS boom," said Oliver Geden, a senior fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs and an expert on CDR.

Also, planting trees to soak up CO2 is fine -- until the forests burn down in climate-enhanced wildfires.

Among all the carbon dioxide removal methods, direct air capture is among the least developed but the most talked about.

- How fast can we scale up? -

Direct air capture (DAC) is a large-scale industrial process that requires huge amounts of energy to run.

Existing technology is also a long way from making a dent in the problem.

The amount, for example, of CO2 potentially extracted from what will be the world's largest direct air capture plant (36,000 tonnes) -- being built in Iceland by Swiss company Climeworks -- is equivalent to 30 seconds' worth of current global emissions (about 40 billion tonnes).

But the trajectory of earlier technologies such as solar panels suggests that scaling the industry up to remove billions of tonnes per year is not out of reach.

"It's at the upper end of what we've seen before," University of Wisconsin–Madison professor Gregory Nemet. "It's a huge challenge, but it's not unprecedented."

Climeworks announced last week the world's first certified CO2 removal and storage on behalf of paying clients, including Microsoft and software service company Stripe.

B.Martinez--TFWP