Wouldn't it be more efficient to remove CO2 from the sea where it has been accumulating as the oceans act as sinks for atmospheric pollutants and ocean acidification is actually more of a problem in the short term?
U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
11–20 of 347 posts
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#12You can remove CO2 extremely cheaply using olivine today, this is a completely fake problem.
> extremely cheaply
What's that in numbers, so we can compare to the number aimed for here?
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#13You can remove CO2 extremely cheaply using olivine today, this is a completely fake problem.
from wikipedia: "All the CO2 that is produced by burning one liter of oil can be sequestered by less than one liter of olivine."
Doesn't that require a monstrous amount of olivine to obtain significant effects?
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#14When these come up, I like to note that we likely also have to think about how to unwind the organizations that will build up around these practices.
Unless every removal op is a vertically integrated loss center in govt or large emitters, there will inevitably be people in the chain whose livelihoods or profits or stockholders benefit from keeping the spigot on (both of money for removal, and of emissions that necessitate it).
This is all assuming invention and improvement don't bootstrap easily scalable straightforwardly profitable removal practices.
Thinking ahead about this means a chance at putting up guardrails before there is an established lobby to push back.
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#15I thought a recent study showed the most effective/cheap method of reducing CO2 was very simple: plant a lot of trees.
Like, really.
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#16> The Department of Energy's Carbon Negative Earthshot seeks to slash the cost of carbon removal to $100 a tonne by the end of the decade At 40 gigatonnes a year, that would be $4 trillion, which is about 5% of Gross World Product.[0] It's probably still cheaper to avoid emitting the CO2 in the first place, but that does put an upper bound on the cost of reaching net zero. Of course, no one wants to take a voluntary…
This sounds great, but how likely is it that the US will manage to reach 100$/GT?
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#17Anything to avoid changing the status quo to reduce emissions. Honestly embarrassing.
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#18> The Department of Energy's Carbon Negative Earthshot seeks to slash the cost of carbon removal to $100 a tonne by the end of the decade At 40 gigatonnes a year, that would be $4 trillion, which is about 5% of Gross World Product.[0] It's probably still cheaper to avoid emitting the CO2 in the first place, but that does put an upper bound on the cost of reaching net zero. Of course, no one wants to take a voluntary…
More importantly, having an actual price tag on removing carbon from the atmosphere would allow carbon markets to finally work. Assuming there is enough political will to properly monitor and tax CO2 emissions worldwide, which is a huge ask. A lot of companies and countries will be tempted to lie because it will make their products more competitive.
Cant we see this from space? Estimate the amount of co2 coming from each country that way and send them a bill every year.
My first thought was “that’s where auditing and bureaucracy come in” but maybe satellites are a better way
Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#19Re: U.S. sets goal to drive down cost of removing CO2 from atmosphere
#20I thought a recent study showed the most effective/cheap method of reducing CO2 was very simple: plant a lot of trees. Like, really.
Ah, but how would certain entities make tons of money with trees? They wouldn't. And that's why we've been hearing about this nonsense for well over a decade now. It's about making money while pretending they're doing something.