"Even #climate commitments that are consistent with 1.5 degrees of warming may still be inconsistent with international law norms,” owing to their heavy reliance on #CarbonRemoval, said the paper, published in Science.
Without legal guidance on the use of carbon removal, said study coauthor Joeri Rogelj, of Imperial College London, governments may face court challenges for their overreliance."
Microsoft announced that it is purchasing 315,000 metric tons of carbon removal over a multi-year period from climate tech startup Heirloom Carbon, one of the biggest deals of its kind… Read More
A suite of CO2 removal approaches modeled for the 1.5 ˚C future
Highlight on paper in Ocean Carbon & Biogeochemistry (OCB)
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is “unavoidable” in efforts to limit end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C. This is because some greenhouse gas emissions sources—non-CO2 from agriculture, and CO2 from shipping, aviation, and industrial processes—will be difficult to avoid, requiring CDR to offset their climate impacts. Policymakers are interested in a wide variety of ways to draw down CO2 from the atmosphere, but to date, the modeling scenarios that inform international climate policies have mostly used biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) as a proxy for all CDR. It is critical to understand the potential of a full suite of CDR technologies, to understand their interactions with energy-water-land systems and to begin preparing for these impacts.
#ClimateChange#CarbonRemoval#USA#Biden: "Let’s start here: Yes, we will probably need carbon dioxide removal, or CDR, to meet the world’s and the country’s climate goals.
This wasn’t always clear. When I started as a climate reporter in 2015, carbon removal was taboo, something that only climate deniers and other folks who wanted to delay decarbonization brought up. An influential Princeton study from earlier in the decade had concluded that carbon removal — especially capturing carbon in the ambient air, a strategy called direct air capture, or DAC — would never pencil out financially and that it would always be cheaper to reduce fossil-fuel use rather than suck carbon out of the sky.
But in 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made a startling announcement: So much carbon dioxide had accumulated in the atmosphere that it would be virtually impossible to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius without carbon removal.
The IPCC studied global energy models and found that even in optimistic scenarios, humanity would release too much carbon by the middle of the century to keep temperatures from briefly rising by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. But if we began removing carbon from the atmosphere, then we could avoid locking in that spike in temperatures for the long term. That is, in order to hit the 1.5-degree goal by 2100, humanity must spend much of the 21st century removing carbon from the atmosphere and sequestering it for thousands of years.
We need carbon removal, in other words, not so we can keep burning fossil fuels, but to deal with the fossil-fuel pollution that is already in the atmosphere."
...looking at low or no overshoot scenarios, we can [then] bring back 👉11 paths by choosing challenging‼️ assumptions instead of only reasonable ones.👈
Much more dramatic #CarbonRemoval from the atmosphere, storing it either underground or in forests and agricultural landscapes. The majority of 👉these scenarios require us to be able to subtract over 7 billion tons per year from the atmosphere by 2050👈.
This will require a huge scale up of interventions like #CarbonCapture..."
Microsoft just signed a giant carbon removal deal to sponge up CO2 using limestone (www.geekwire.com)
Microsoft announced that it is purchasing 315,000 metric tons of carbon removal over a multi-year period from climate tech startup Heirloom Carbon, one of the biggest deals of its kind… Read More