Carbon Capture And Sequestration — The Dream That Won't Die - R&D Insights Carbon Capturing Solutions

Join daily news updates from CleanTechnica on e mail. Or follow us on Google News!

Carbon seize and sequestration characterize a shining alternative for some, like Heirloom, a California startup that opened its first demonstration plant final yr. This week, it introduced it has raised an extra $150 million from traders, cash it is going to use to broaden its operations because it continues to hunt a path to profitability. Additionally it is one among a number of firms concerned within the Division of Vitality backed regional direct air capture hubs that can theoretically have the ability to seize a million tons of carbon dioxide a yr as soon as operational.

The demonstration plant in California can seize as much as 1000 tons of carbon dioxide a yr however the subsequent Heirloom facility in Louisiana is predicted to take away 17,000 tons of carbon dioxide yearly — a statistically insignificant quantity in comparison with the just about 40 billion tons the world pumps into the ambiance yearly. And right here’s the factor: A spokesperson for Heirloom advised Canary Media lately that the price of eradicating a ton of carbon dioxide is between $600 and $1,000 per ton. I’m no mathematician, as my readers know all too properly, however 40 billion tons multiplied by $600 a ton — the most effective case situation at current — is $24 trillion a yr.

Heirloom expects the business to get to a basic worth of between $200 and $300 per ton by the early a part of the following decade, including that the startup “has line of sight to profitability at those prices.” The corporate “is on a trajectory” to hit $100 per ton, the spokesperson mentioned, which is usually considered by the business and others as the perfect worth level for direct air seize. “We believe DAC is all about cost, cost, and cost — and that it will only scale to make a meaningful difference on climate change if it is affordable,” Heirloom CEO and co-founder Shashank Samala mentioned in an announcement.

That’s maybe probably the most fatuous, self-serving assertion we’ve heard round CleanTechnica headquarters in a very long time. Every part is about price. $200,000 EVs are a non-starter within the market, however $20,000 EVs would discover loads of demand. We all know that new applied sciences take time to scale and costs drop as gross sales go up, however individuals have been attempting to spin straw into gold on this planet of local weather seize for fairly a while without any tangible success. Principally, it’s a merciless joke that the fossil gasoline business has embraced as a method of claiming don’t fear about carbon emissions immediately, as a result of sometime within the far distant future we’ll work out take care of them. Within the meantime, simply return to sleep whereas we stick with enterprise as ordinary. What is very galling is that they count on another person to pay to scrub up their mess whereas they snort all the way in which to the financial institution.

The subsequent query is, what do you do with the carbon dioxide when (and if) you seize it? The Heirloom direct air seize course of entails shortening the time it takes for limestone to soak up carbon dioxide from years to a couple days. The corporate’s companions then combine the the limestone with concrete or retailer it underground. That’s simpler mentioned than completed.

New Research Says Carbon Should Be Saved For 1000 Years

A research by Cyril Brunner, Zeke Hausfather, and Reto Knutti revealed within the journal Communications Earth & Environment on November 11, 2024, involves a startling conclusion. Within the summary of the research, the authors write:

“Carbon dioxide elimination is important for attaining internet zero emissions, as it’s required to neutralize any residual CO2 emissions. The scientifically acknowledged definition of carbon dioxide elimination requires eliminated atmospheric CO2 to be saved ‘durably.’ Nevertheless, it stays unclear what is supposed by durably, and interpretations have various from a long time to millennia. Utilizing a reduced-complexity local weather mannequin, right here we examined the impact of carbon dioxide elimination with various CO2 storage durations.

“We found that storage duration substantially affects whether net zero emissions achieve the desired temperature outcomes. With a typical 100-year storage duration, net zero CO2 emissions with 6 GtCO2 per year residual emissions result in an additional warming of 0.8 °C by 2500 compared to permanent storage, thus putting the internationally agreed temperature limits at risk. Our findings suggest that a CO2 storage period of less than 1000 years (emphasis added) is insufficient for neutralizing remaining fossil CO2 emissions under net zero emissions. These results reinforce the principle that credible neutralization claims using carbon dioxide removal in a net zero framework require balancing emissions with removals of similar atmospheric residence time and storage reservoir — e.g., geological or biogenic.”

Anthropocene Magazine places the outcomes of the research within the vernacular for these of us who are usually not local weather scientists. It says 1,000-year methods sequester carbon for about so long as it takes for the carbon to be naturally recycled out of the ambiance. Shorter time period methods that solely maintain carbon for 100 years will consequence within the re-release of that carbon lengthy earlier than the emissions which are being offset would depart the ambiance naturally. The results of these short-term methods can be extra, unaccounted for emissions and extra warming.

For instance, suppose there’s a want for atmospheric carbon elimination to offset 6 gigatons per yr of residual carbon dioxide emissions. If that carbon is sequestered for less than 100 years, its re-release would lead to an extra 1.1°C of warming by the yr 2500 in comparison with everlasting carbon storage, the researchers calculated. The findings are “not really” stunning, in accordance with Brunner. “The basis for our conclusions has been well-known for more than a decade,” he says. However the brand new evaluation lays naked the contradictions of the present strategy in stark numbers for the primary time. “That does not mean that carbon dioxide removal with shorter storage durations than 1,000 years is not useful.” Fairly the alternative, he explains. Pure carbon sequestration methods can enhance air and water high quality and safeguard biodiversity, and may additionally be helpful to offset emissions of shorter lived greenhouse gases corresponding to methane. Extra analysis is required, he says.

The time scale of carbon sequestration issues quite a bit, Brunner and his colleagues recommend. Utilizing a simplified local weather mannequin to learn the way completely different durations of carbon storage would have an effect on complete warming, they discovered that only one,000-year carbon storage methods will keep away from additional warming from residual carbon emissions. Broadly talking, there are two methods to sequester carbon faraway from the ambiance. Pure carbon sequestration, by which crops soak up carbon dioxide from the air and retailer it of their tissues, lasts about 100 years. Compelled carbon sequestration, by which carbon dioxide is injected into underground rock formations or sunk in blocks to the underside of the ocean, ought to final for a minimum of 1,000 years.

The Takeaway

Sharp-eyed readers will discover the standard information story about carbon sequestration seldom mentions how lengthy the carbon can be sequestered — a fabric flaw in any dialog about direct air seize. The belief is that when sequestered, it is going to keep sequestered, however everyone knows concerning the phrase “assume” by now, don’t we? That implies all the flowery guarantees we hear about sucking carbon dioxide out of the ambiance and piping it underground are apt to be a lot too optimistic at greatest and intentionally deceptive at worst.

The researchers try to shut a loophole right here, however will anybody hear? Definitely, primarily based on previous expertise, there may be little motive to assume the fossil gasoline crowd desires to delve too deeply into the ramifications of this analysis. They’ve been mendacity to us for 7 a long time and are usually not about to let little issues like fact or accuracy intervene with their carbon seize dream.