Noteworthy Studies on Negative Emission Technologies
Covers all of environmental science, providing a coherent and integrated approach, including research articles, perspectives and review articles.
Part 1: Research landscape
and synthesis
Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects
Part 3: Innovation and upscaling
Key takeaways from negative emissions research:
A-BECCS
CO2 equivalent that will need to be removed to end climate change.
There is an excess of 500Gt of CO2 that must be taken out to the air to end climate change. As more fuels are burned, they add to that amount. (This simplified illustration puts it in context)
This is the up to date analysis, with yearly human emissions in billions of tons on the (Y)Axis.
The cost by measure of C02:
Key points in this graph are:
- If you multiply the (X) axis of the graph (billions of tons of Co2) by the (Y) axis (USD/ton of Co2), you quickly get into the trillions of dollars/year for the removal of less than a quarter of human yearly emissions (20Gt/year). This likely will not be sustainable without additional economic benefits from external positive co-factors.
- Forestry, Biochar and Carbon Farming (aka Soil Sequestration), are the only current carbon-negative emission technologies available today with many positive external co-factors.
- DAC and Weathering, require massive energy and mineral mining, making them unlikely to scale. Their climate impact will likely remain low, as they have no general externalities to reap economic growth from. Not to mention they fall under the category of Geo-planetary Engineering, making them controversial to implement.
Good summary here:
Carbon Capture Comparison Scientific-American
Pros and Cons, for some negative emission technologies:
