Английская Википедия:Carbon dioxide removal

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Версия от 01:15, 15 февраля 2024; EducationBot (обсуждение | вклад) (Новая страница: «{{Английская Википедия/Панель перехода}} {{Short description|Removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide through human activity}} {{About|removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere|technologies that remove carbon dioxide from point sources|Carbon capture and storage}} {{Use American English|date=January 2019}} {{Use mdy dates|date=January 2019}} File:Tree planting closeup.jpg|thumb|Planting trees is a [[Nature-based solutions|na...»)
(разн.) ← Предыдущая версия | Текущая версия (разн.) | Следующая версия → (разн.)
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:About Шаблон:Use American English Шаблон:Use mdy dates

Файл:Tree planting closeup.jpg
Planting trees is a nature-based way to temporarily remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.[1][2]

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR), also known as carbon removal, greenhouse gas removal (GGR) or negative emissions, is a process in which carbon dioxide gas (Шаблон:CO2) is removed from the atmosphere by deliberate human activities and durably stored in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products.[3]Шаблон:Rp In the context of net zero greenhouse gas emissions targets,[4] CDR is increasingly integrated into climate policy, as an element of climate change mitigation strategies.[5] Achieving net zero emissions will require both deep cuts in emissions and the use of CDR, but CDR is not a current climate solution.[6] In the future, CDR may be able to counterbalance emissions that are technically difficult to eliminate, such as some agricultural and industrial emissions.[7]Шаблон:Rp

CDR methods include afforestation, reforestation, agricultural practices that sequester carbon in soils (carbon farming), wetland restoration and blue carbon approaches, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), ocean fertilization, ocean alkalinity enhancement,[8] and direct air capture when combined with storage,[9]Шаблон:Rp To assess whether negative emissions are achieved by a particular process, comprehensive life cycle analysis and monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) of the process must be performed.[10]

As of 2023, CDR is estimated to remove around 2 gigatons of Шаблон:CO2 per year,[11] which is equivalent to 4% of the greenhouse gases emitted per year by human activities.[12]Шаблон:Rp. Equitable allocation of CDR suggest countries remove 17% of their residual emissions in 2040 to achieve 1.5℃ goal.[13] However, there is significant uncertainty around this number because there is no established or accurate method of quantifying the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere. There is potential to remove and sequester up to 10 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year by using those existing CDR methods which can be safely and economically deployed now.[12]

Definitions

Шаблон:Carbon cycle

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is defined by the IPCC as:

Шаблон:Blockquote

Synonyms for CDR include greenhouse gas removal (GGR),[14] negative emissions technology,[12] and carbon removal.[15] Technologies have been proposed for removing non-Шаблон:CO2 greenhouse gases such as methane from the atmosphere,[16] but only carbon dioxide is currently feasible to remove at scale.[14] Therefore, in most contexts, greenhouse gas removal means carbon dioxide removal.

The term geoengineering (or climate engineering) is sometimes used in the scientific literature for both CDR or SRM (solar radiation management), if the techniques are used at a global scale.[17]Шаблон:Rp The terms geoengineering or climate engineering are no longer used in IPCC reports.[3]

Categories

CDR methods can be placed in different categories that are based on different criteria:[9]Шаблон:Rp

  • Role in the carbon cycle (land-based biological; ocean-based biological; geochemical; chemical); or
  • Timescale of storage (decades to centuries; centuries to millennia; thousand years or longer)

Concepts using similar terminology

CDR can be confused with carbon capture and storage (CCS), a process in which carbon dioxide is collected from point-sources such as gas-fired power plants, whose smokestacks emit Шаблон:CO2 in a concentrated stream. The Шаблон:CO2 is then compressed and sequestered or utilized.[18] When used to sequester the carbon from a gas-fired power plant, CCS reduces emissions from continued use of the point source, but does not reduce the amount of carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere.

Role in climate change mitigation

Use of CDR reduces the overall rate at which humans are adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.[7]Шаблон:Rp The Earth's surface temperature will stabilize only after global emissions have been reduced to net zero,[19] which will require both aggressive efforts to reduce emissions and deployment of CDR.[7]Шаблон:Rp It is not feasible to bring net emissions to zero without CDR as certain types of emissions are technically difficult to eliminate.[7]Шаблон:Rp Emissions that are difficult to eliminate include nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture,[7]Шаблон:Rp aviation emissions,[12]Шаблон:Rp and some industrial emissions.[7]Шаблон:Rp In climate change mitigation strategies, the use of CDR counterbalances those emissions.[7]Шаблон:Rp

After net zero emissions have been achieved, CDR could be used to reduce atmospheric Шаблон:CO2 concentrations, which could partially reverse the warming that has already occurred by that date.[7] All emission pathways that limit global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C by the year 2100 assume the use of CDR in combination with emission reductions.[20][21]

Reliance on large-scale deployment of CDR was regarded in 2018 as a "major risk" to achieving the goal of less than 1.5 °C of warming, given the uncertainties in how quickly CDR can be deployed at scale.[22] Strategies for mitigating climate change that rely less on CDR and more on sustainable use of energy carry less of this risk.[22][23] The possibility of large-scale future CDR deployment has been described as a moral hazard, as it could lead to a reduction in near-term efforts to mitigate climate change.[21]Шаблон:Rp[12] The 2019 NASEM report concludes:

Шаблон:Blockquote

When CDR is framed as a form of climate engineering, people tend to view it as intrinsically risky.[12]Шаблон:Request quotation In fact, CDR addresses the root cause of climate change and is part of strategies to reduce net emissions and manage risks related to elevated atmospheric CO2 levels.Шаблон:Request quotation[24][25]

Permanence

Forests, kelp beds, and other forms of plant life absorb carbon dioxide from the air as they grow, and bind it into biomass. However, these biological stores are considered volatile carbon sinks as the long-term sequestration cannot be guaranteed. For example, natural events, such as wildfires or disease, economic pressures and changing political priorities can result in the sequestered carbon being released back into the atmosphere.[26]

Biomass, such as trees, can directly stored into the Earth's subsurface.[27] Furthermore carbon dioxide that has been removed from the atmosphere can be stored in the Earth's crust by injecting it into the subsurface, or in the form of insoluble carbonate salts. This is because they are removing carbon from the atmosphere and sequestering it indefinitely and presumably for a considerable duration (thousands to millions of years).

Current and potential scale

As of 2023, CDR is estimated to remove about 2 gigatons of Шаблон:CO2 per year, almost entirely by low-tech methods like reforestation and the creation of new forests.[11] This is equivalent to 4% of the greenhouse gases emitted per year by human activities.[12]Шаблон:Rp A 2019 consensus study report by NASEM assessed the potential of all forms of CDR other than ocean fertilization that could be deployed safely and economically using current technologies, and estimated that they could remove up to 10 gigatons of Шаблон:CO2 per year if fully deployed worldwide.[12] In 2018, all analyzed mitigation pathways that would prevent more than 1.5 °C of warming included CDR measures.[22]

Some mitigation pathways propose achieving higher rates of CDR through massive deployment of one technology, however these pathways assume that hundreds of millions of hectares of cropland are converted to growing biofuel crops.[12] Further research in the areas of direct air capture, geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, and carbon mineralization could potentially yield technological advancements that make higher rates of CDR economically feasible.[12]

Methods

Overview listing based on technology readiness level

The following is a list of known CDR methods in the order of their technology readiness level (TRL). The ones at the top have a high TRL of 8 to 9 (9 being the maximum possible value, meaning the technology is proven), the ones at the bottom have a low TRL of 1 to 2, meaning the technology is not proven or only validated at laboratory scale.[9]Шаблон:Rp

  1. Afforestation/ reforestation
  2. Soil carbon sequestration in croplands and grasslands
  3. Peatland and coastal wetland restoration
  4. Agroforestry, improved forest management
  5. Biochar carbon removal (BCR)
  6. Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)
  7. Enhanced weathering (alkalinity enhancement)
  8. 'Blue carbon management' in coastal wetlands (restoration of vegetated coastal ecosystems; an ocean-based biological CDR method which encompasses mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass beds)
  9. Ocean fertilisation, ocean alkalinity enhancement that amplifies the Oceanic carbon cycle

The CDR methods with the greatest potential to contribute to climate change mitigation efforts as per illustrative mitigation pathways are the land-based biological CDR methods (primarily afforestation/reforestation (A/R)) and/or bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Some of the pathways also include direct air capture and storage (DACCS).[9]Шаблон:Rp

Afforestation, reforestation, and forestry management

Trees use photosynthesis to absorb carbon dioxide and store the carbon in wood and soils.[15] Afforestation is the establishment of a forest in an area where there was previously no forest.[7]Шаблон:Rp Reforestation is the re-establishment of a forest that has been previously cleared.[7]Шаблон:Rp Forests are vital for human society, animals and plant species. This is because trees keep air clean, regulate the local climate and provide a habitat for numerous species.[28]

As trees grow they absorb Шаблон:CO2 from the atmosphere and store it in living biomass, dead organic matter and soils. Afforestation and reforestation – sometimes referred to collectively as 'forestation' – facilitate this process of carbon removal by establishing or re-establishing forest areas. It takes forests approximately 10 years to ramp- up to the maximum sequestration rate.[29]Шаблон:Rp

Depending on the species, the trees will reach maturity after around 20 to 100 years, after which they store carbon but do not actively remove it from the atmosphere.[29]Шаблон:Rp Carbon can be stored in forests indefinitely, but the storage can also be much more short-lived as trees are vulnerable to being cut, burned, or killed by disease or drought.[29]Шаблон:Rp Once mature, forest products can be harvested and the biomass stored in long-lived wood products, or used for bioenergy or biochar. Consequent forest regrowth then allows continuing Шаблон:CO2 removal.[29]Шаблон:Rp

Risks to deployment of new forest include the availability of land, competition with other land uses, and the comparatively long time from planting to maturity.[29]Шаблон:Rp

Agricultural practices

Carbon farming is a name for a variety of agricultural methods aimed at sequestering atmospheric carbon into the soil and in crop roots, wood and leaves. Increasing a soil's organic matter content can aid plant growth, increase total carbon content, improve soil water retention capacity[30] and reduce fertilizer use.[31] Carbon farming methods will typically have a cost, meaning farmers and land-owners need a way to profit from the use of carbon farming, thus requiring government programs.[32]

Bioenergy with carbon capture & storage (BECCS)

Шаблон:Excerpt

Biochar Carbon Removal (BCR)

Шаблон:Main

Biochar is created by the pyrolysis of biomass, and is under investigation as a method of carbon sequestration. Biochar is a charcoal that is used for agricultural purposes which also aids in carbon sequestration, the capture or hold of carbon. It is created using a process called pyrolysis, which is basically the act of high temperature heating biomass in an environment with low oxygen levels. What remains is a material known as char, similar to charcoal but is made through a sustainable process, thus the use of biomass.[33] Biomass is organic matter produced by living organisms or recently living organisms, most commonly plants or plant based material.[34] A study done by the UK Biochar Research Center has stated that, on a conservative level, biochar can store 1 gigaton of carbon per year. With greater effort in marketing and acceptance of biochar, the benefit of Biochar Carbon Removal could be the storage of 5–9 gigatons per year in soils.[35]Шаблон:Better source needed However, at the moment, biochar is restricted by the terrestrial carbon storage capacity, when the system reaches the state of equilibrium, and requires regulation because of threats of leakage.[36]

Direct air capture with carbon sequestration (DACCS)

Файл:2010- Direct Air Capture - global - International Energy Agency (IEA) - bar chart.svg
The International Energy Agency reported growth in direct air capture global operating capacity.[37]

Шаблон:Excerpt

Marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR)

Шаблон:See also

Файл:CO2 pump hg.svg
Шаблон:Chem sequestration in the ocean

There are several methods of sequestering carbon from the ocean, where dissolved carbonate in the form of carbonic acid is in equilibrium with atmospheric carbon dioxide.[8] These include ocean fertilization, the purposeful introduction of plant nutrients to the upper ocean.[38][39] While one of the more well-researched carbon dioxide removal approaches, ocean fertilization would only sequester carbon on a timescale of 10-100 years. While surface ocean acidity may decrease as a result of nutrient fertilization, sinking organic matter will remineralize, increasing deep ocean acidity. A 2021 report on CDR indicates that there is medium-high confidence that the technique could be efficient and scalable at low cost, with medium environmental risks.[40] Ocean fertilization is estimated to be able to sequester 0.1 to 1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide per year at a cost of USD $8 to $80 per tonne.[8]

Ocean alkalinity enhancement involves grinding, dispersing, and dissolving minerals such as olivine, limestone, silicates, or calcium hydroxide to precipitate carbonate sequestered as deposits on the ocean floor.[41] The removal potential of alkalinity enhancement is uncertain, and estimated at between 0.1 to 1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide per year at a cost of USD $100 to $150 per tonne.[8]

Electrochemical techniques such as electrodialysis can remove carbonate from seawater using electricity. While such techniques used in isolation are estimated to be able to remove 0.1 to 1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide per year at a cost of USD $150 to $2,500 per tonne,[8] these methods are much less expensive when performed in conjunction with seawater processing such as desalination, where salt and carbonate are simultaneously removed.[42] Preliminary estimates suggest that the cost of such carbon removal can be paid for in large part if not entirely from the sale of the desalinated water produced as a byproduct.[43]

Issues

Economic issues

Шаблон:Further The cost of CDR differs substantially depending on the maturity of the technology employed as well as the economics of both voluntary carbon removal markets and the physical output; for example, the pyrolysis of biomass produces biochar that has various commercial applications, including soil regeneration and wastewater treatment.[44] In 2021 DAC cost from $250 to $600 per ton, compared to $100 for biochar and less than $50 for nature-based solutions, such as reforestation and afforestation.[45][46] The fact that biochar commands a higher price in the carbon removal market than nature-based solutions reflects the fact that it is a more durable sink with carbon being sequestered for hundreds or even thousands of years while nature-based solutions represent a more volatile form of storage, which risks related to forest fires, pests, economic pressures and changing political priorities.[47] The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting states that to be compatible with the Paris Agreement: "...organizations must commit to gradually increase the percentage of carbon removal offsets they procure with the view of exclusively sourcing carbon removals by mid-century."[47] These initiatives along with the development of new industry standards for engineered carbon removal, such as the Puro Standard, will help to support the growth of the carbon removal market.[48]

Although CDR is not covered by the EU Allowance as of 2021, the European Commission is preparing for carbon removal certification and considering carbon contracts for difference.[49][50] CDR might also in future be added to the UK Emissions Trading Scheme.[51] As of end 2021 carbon prices for both these cap-and-trade schemes currently based on carbon reductions, as opposed to carbon removals, remained below $100.[52][53]

As of early 2023, financing has fell short of the sums required for high-tech CDR methods to contribute significantly to climate change mitigation. Though available funds have recently increased substantially. Most of this increase has been from voluntary private sector initiatives. [54] Such as a private sector alliance led by Stripe with prominent members including Meta, Google and Shopify, which in April 2022 revealed a nearly $1 billion fund to reward companies able to permanently capture & store carbon. According to senior Stripe employee Nan Ransohoff, the fund was "roughly 30 times the carbon-removal market that existed in 2021. But it's still 1,000 times short of the market we need by 2050."[55] The predominance of private sector funding has raised concerns as historically, voluntary markets have proved "orders of magnitude"[54] smaller than those brought about by government policy. As of 2023 however, various governments have increased their support for CDR; these include Sweden, Switzerland, and the US. Recent activity from the US government includes the June 2022 Notice of Intent to fund the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law's $3.5 billion CDR program, and the signing into law of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which contains the 45Q tax to enhance the CDR market. [54] [56]

Removal of other greenhouse gases

Although some researchers have suggested methods for removing methane, others say that nitrous oxide would be a better subject for research due to its longer lifetime in the atmosphere.[57]

See also

Шаблон:Portal

References

Шаблон:Reflist

External links

Шаблон:Commons category

Шаблон:Global warming Шаблон:Authority control

Партнерские ресурсы
Криптовалюты
Магазины
Хостинг
Разное

  1. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  2. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  3. ↑ 3,0 3,1 IPCC, 2021: "Annex VII: Glossary". Matthews, J.B.R., V. Möller, R. van Diemen, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C.  Méndez, S. Semenov, A. Reisinger (eds.). In "Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change". Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2215–2256, Шаблон:Doi
  4. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  5. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  6. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  7. ↑ 7,0 7,1 7,2 7,3 7,4 7,5 7,6 7,7 7,8 7,9 Шаблон:Cite book
  8. ↑ 8,0 8,1 8,2 8,3 8,4 Шаблон:Citation
  9. ↑ 9,0 9,1 9,2 9,3 M. Pathak, R. Slade, P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Pichs-Madruga, D. Ürge-Vorsatz,2022: Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. Шаблон:Doi
  10. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  11. ↑ 11,0 11,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  12. ↑ 12,0 12,1 12,2 12,3 12,4 12,5 12,6 12,7 12,8 12,9 Шаблон:Cite book
  13. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  14. ↑ 14,0 14,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  15. ↑ 15,0 15,1 Шаблон:Cite journal
  16. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  17. ↑ IPCC (2022) Chapter 1: Introduction and Framing in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
  18. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  19. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  20. ↑ Page 4-81, IPCC Sixth Assessment Report Working Group 1, 9/8/21, https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/ Шаблон:Webarchive
  21. ↑ 21,0 21,1 Rogelj, J., D. Shindell, K. Jiang, S. Fifita, P. Forster, V. Ginzburg, C. Handa, H. Kheshgi, S. Kobayashi, E. Kriegler, L. Mundaca, R. Séférian, and M.V.Vilariño, 2018: Chapter 2: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 93-174. Шаблон:Doi
  22. ↑ 22,0 22,1 22,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  23. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  24. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  25. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  26. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  27. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  28. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  29. ↑ 29,0 29,1 29,2 29,3 29,4 Шаблон:Cite book Файл:CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  30. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  31. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  32. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  33. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  34. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  35. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  36. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  37. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  38. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  39. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  40. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  41. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  42. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  43. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  44. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  45. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  46. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  47. ↑ 47,0 47,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  48. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  49. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  50. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  51. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  52. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  53. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  54. ↑ 54,0 54,1 54,2 Шаблон:Cite journal
  55. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  56. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  57. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
Источник — http://wikihandbk.com/ruwiki/index.php?title=Английская_Википедия:Carbon_dioxide_removal&oldid=13771284