GCC: Report finds says “negative emissions technologies” need to play a large role in mitigating climate change
Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:01 pm
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/1 ... 9-nas.html
To achieve goals for climate and economic growth, “negative emissions technologies” (NETs) that remove and sequester carbon dioxide from the air will need to play a significant role in mitigating climate change, according to a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The report—“Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration”—calls for the launch of a substantial research initiative to advance these technologies as soon as possible.
Although climate mitigation remains the motivation for global investments in NETs, the committee that carried out the study and wrote the report determined that advances in NETs also could have economic rewards, as intellectual property rights and economic benefits will likely accrue to the nations that develop the best technology. . . .
Unlike carbon capture and storage technologies that remove carbon dioxide emissions directly from large point sources such as coal power plants, NETs remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere or enhance natural carbon sinks. . . .
The committee concluded that the NETs available today could be safely scaled up to capture and store a significant fraction of the total emissions both in the US and globally, but not enough to keep total global warming below two degrees Celsius, the target of the Paris agreement.
Therefore, a concerted research effort is needed to address the constraints that currently limit deployment of NETs, such as high costs, land and environmental constraints, and energy requirements.
Four land-based negative emissions technologies are ready for large-scale deployment at costs competitive with emissions mitigation strategies, the report says. These technologies include reforestation, changes in forest management, and changes in agricultural practices that enhance soil carbon storage. The fourth NET ready for scale up is “bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration”—in which plants or plant-based materials are used to produce electricity, liquid fuels, and/or heat, and any carbon dioxide that is produced is captured and sequestered.
However, these four NETs cannot yet provide enough carbon removal at reasonable cost without substantial unintended harm, the report says. Repurposing a significant amount of current agricultural land for growing new forests or feedstocks for bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration could have significant effects on food availability. Repurposing tropical forest would harm biodiversity. Research could identify ways to soften the land constraint, for instance, by developing crop plants that take up and sequester carbon more efficiently in soils, or by reducing food waste or demand for meat.
Two other negative emissions technologies could be revolutionary, the committee said, because they have high potential capacity to remove carbon. Direct air capture employs chemical processes to capture carbon dioxide from the air, concentrate it, and inject it into a storage reservoir. However, it is currently limited by high cost. There is no commercial driving force for developing direct air capture technologies; therefore, developing a low-cost option will require sustained government investment.
Carbon mineralization—which essentially accelerates “weathering” so carbon dioxide from the atmosphere forms a chemical bond with reactive minerals—is currently limited by lack of fundamental understanding.
The committee also examined coastal blue carbon, which involves changing land use and management practices to increase carbon stored in living plants or sediments in coastal ecosystems such as tidal marshlands. Although it has a relatively low potential capacity for removing carbon, the committee concluded that coastal blue carbon warrants continued exploration and support. The cost of the carbon removal is low or zero, because investments in many coastal blue carbon projects target other benefits such as coastal adaptation. An increase in understanding of how sea-level rise, coastal management, and other climate impacts could affect future carbon uptake rates is needed. . . .