![]() It includes two DAC technologies, with different energy inputs and cost assumptions, and a range of energy inputs including waste heat. “This is the first inter-model comparison… has the most detailed representation of DAC so far used in IAMs. Study author Dr Ajay Gambhir, senior research fellow at the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London, explains to Carbon Brief: Today’s new study explores how DAC could help meet global climate goals with “lower costs”, using two different integrated assessment models (IAMs). If the CO2 is then buried underground, the process is sometimes referred to as direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). One alternative is direct air capture, where machines are used to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere. The significant potential role for BECCS raises a number of concerns, with land areas up to five times the size of India devoted to growing the biomass needed in some model pathways. This is where biomass, such as wood pellets, is burned to generate electricity and the resulting CO2 is captured and stored. However, model pathways developed by researchers rely most heavily on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage ( BECCS). This catch-all term covers a wide range of approaches, including planting trees, restoring peatlands and other “ natural climate solutions”. Meeting this ambition will require the use of “ negative emissions technologies” to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The 2015 Paris Agreement set a goal of limiting human-caused warming to “well below” 2C and an ambition of staying below 1.5C. He tells Carbon Brief that his firm nevertheless “continuously push back on the ‘magic bullet’ headlines”. This means policymakers should not see DAC as a “panacea” that can replace immediate efforts to cut emissions, one of the study authors tells Carbon Brief, adding: “The risks of that are too high.”ĭAC should be seen as a “backstop for challenging abatement” where cutting emissions is too complex or too costly, says the chief executive of a startup developing the technology. ![]() It shows that a “massive” and energy-intensive rollout of the technology could cut the cost of limiting warming to 1.5 or 2C above pre-industrial levels.īut the study also highlights the “clear risks” of assuming that DAC will be available at scale, with global temperature goals being breached by up to 0.8C if the technology then fails to deliver. ![]() The research, published today in Nature Communications, is the first to explore the use of direct air capture (DAC) in multiple computer models. Machines that suck CO2 directly from the air could cut the cost of meeting global climate goals, a new study finds, but they would need as much as a quarter of global energy supplies in 2100.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |