Home  ›  What Is the Name of the Process That Plants Use to Remove Carbon From the Atmosphere?

What Is the Name of the Process That Plants Use to Remove Carbon From the Atmosphere?

Written By Sunday, 3 April 2022 Add Comment Edit

Removal of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere

This article is about removing carbon dioxide from the temper. For technologies that remove carbon dioxide from point sources, come across Carbon capture and storage.

Planting trees is a means of carbon dioxide removal.

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR), also known as negative CO2 emissions, is a process in which carbon dioxide gas (CO2) is removed from the atmosphere and sequestered for long periods of time.[one] [ii] [iii] Similarly, greenhouse gas removal (GGR) or negative greenhouse gas emissions is the removal of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the atmosphere past deliberate human activities, i.e., in improver to the removal that would occur via natural carbon wheel or atmospheric chemistry processes.[four] In the context of internet zero greenhouse gas emissions targets,[5] CDR is increasingly integrated into climate policy, every bit a new element of mitigation strategies.[6] CDR and GGR methods are too known as negative emissions technologies, (Internet) and may be cheaper than preventing some agronomical greenhouse gas emissions.[vii]

CDR methods include afforestation, agricultural practices that sequester carbon in soils, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, bounding main fertilization, enhanced weathering, and direct air capture when combined with storage.[two] [8] [9] To assess whether net negative emissions are accomplished by a item process, comprehensive life cycle assay of the process must be performed.

A 2019 consensus report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) ended that using existing CDR methods at scales that tin can be safely and economically deployed, there is potential to remove and sequester up to x gigatons of carbon dioxide per year.[seven] This would beginning greenhouse gas emissions at virtually a 5th of the rate at which they are being produced.

In 2021 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said that emission pathways that limit globally averaged warming to 1.v °C or ii °C by the twelvemonth 2100 assume the utilise of CDR approaches in combination with emission reductions.[10] [eleven]

Definitions [edit]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change defines CDR as:

Anthropogenic activities removing CO2 from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products. It includes existing and potential anthropogenic enhancement of biological or geochemical sinks and directly air capture and storage, but excludes natural CO2 uptake non directly caused by human being activities.[1]

The U.South.-based National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine uses the term "negative emissions technology" with a similar definition.[seven]

The concept of deliberately reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is often mistakenly classified with solar radiation management every bit a class of climate engineering[ contradictory ] and assumed to be intrinsically risky.[7] [ demand quotation to verify ] In fact, CDR addresses the root cause of climate change and is part of strategies to reduce cyberspace emissions and manage risks related to elevated atmospheric CO2 levels.[2] [12]

Concepts using similar terminology [edit]

CDR tin can be confused with carbon capture and storage (CCS), a procedure in which carbon dioxide is collected from point-sources such as gas-fired power plants, whose smokestacks emit CO2 in a full-bodied stream. The CO2 is then compressed and sequestered or utilized.[1] When used to sequester the carbon from a gas-fired power plant, CCS reduces emissions from continued use of the point source, only does non reduce the corporeality of carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere.

Potential for climate change mitigation [edit]

Using CDR in parallel with other efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as deploying renewable energy, is likely to be less expensive and disruptive than using other efforts solitary.[vii] A 2019 consensus report report by NASEM assessed the potential of all forms of CDR other than body of water fertilization that could be deployed safely and economically using electric current technologies, and estimated that they could remove up to x gigatons of CO2 per year if fully deployed worldwide.[vii] This is one-fifth of the 50 gigatons of CO2 emitted per year past human activities.[7] In the IPCC's 2018 analysis of means to limit climate change, all analyzed mitigation pathways that would prevent more than 1.five °C of warming included CDR measures.[thirteen]

Some mitigation pathways propose achieving higher rates of CDR through massive deployment of ane technology, however these pathways presume that hundreds of millions of hectares of cropland are converted to growing biofuel crops.[7] Farther research in the areas of direct air capture, geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, and carbon mineralization could potentially yield technological advancements that make college rates of CDR economically feasible.[seven]

The IPCC'southward 2018 study said that reliance on large-calibration deployment of CDR would be a "major risk" to achieving the goal of less than 1.five °C of warming, given the uncertainties in how quickly CDR can be deployed at calibration.[thirteen] Strategies for mitigating climatic change that rely less on CDR and more on sustainable employ of energy behave less of this risk.[13] [fourteen] The possibility of large-scale future CDR deployment has been described as a moral take a chance, as it could lead to a reduction in near-term efforts to mitigate climatic change.[15] [7] The 2019 NASEM report concludes:

Any argument to delay mitigation efforts because NETs volition provide a backstop drastically misrepresents their current capacities and the likely pace of enquiry progress.[7]

Carbon sequestration [edit]

Forests, kelp beds, and other forms of constitute life blot carbon dioxide from the air as they grow, and bind it into biomass. Nevertheless, these biological stores are considered volatile carbon sinks as the long-term sequestration cannot be guaranteed. For instance, natural events, such every bit wildfires or affliction, economic pressures and changing political priorities tin outcome in the sequestered carbon being released back into the atmosphere.[16]

Carbon dioxide that has been removed from the temper can likewise be stored in the World'south crust by injecting it into the subsurface, or in the form of insoluble carbonate salts (mineral sequestration). This is because they are removing carbon from the atmosphere and sequestering information technology indefinitely and presumably for a considerable duration (thousands to millions of years).

Methods [edit]

Afforestation, reforestation, and forestry management [edit]

According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature: "Halting the loss and degradation of natural systems and promoting their restoration have the potential to contribute over one-third of the full climatic change mitigation scientists say is required by 2030."[17]

Forests are vital for human social club, animals and constitute species. This is considering trees keep air clean, regulate the local climate and provide a habitat for numerous species. Trees and plants catechumen carbon dioxide back into oxygen, using photosynthesis. They are important for regulating CO2 levels in the air, as they remove and shop carbon from the air. Without them, the temper would rut up speedily and destabilise the climate.[18]

Increased use of woods in construction is being considered.[nineteen]

Biosequestration [edit]

Biosequestration is the capture and storage of the atmospheric greenhouse gas carbon dioxide by continual or enhanced biological processes. This form of carbon sequestration occurs through increased rates of photosynthesis via land-use practices such as reforestation, sustainable woods management, and genetic engineering science. The SALK Harnessing Plants Initiative led by Joanne Chory is an case of an enhanced photosynthesis initiative[twenty] [21] Carbon sequestration through biological processes affects the global carbon cycle.

Agricultural practices [edit]

Carbon farming is a name for a diversity of agricultural methods aimed at sequestering atmospheric carbon into the soil and in crop roots, wood and leaves. The aim of carbon farming is to increase the charge per unit at which carbon is sequestered into soil and plant material with the goal of creating a cyberspace loss of carbon from the temper.[22] Increasing a soil'southward organic matter content can aid plant growth, increase full carbon content, improve soil water retention capacity[23] and reduce fertilizer use.[24] [25] As of 2016, variants of carbon farming reached hundreds of millions of hectares globally, of the nearly 5 billion hectares (i.2×1010 acres) of world farmland.[26] [27] In improver to agricultural activities, forests management is too a tool that is used in carbon farming. [28] The practice of carbon farming is often washed by individual land owners who are given incentive to apply and to integrate methods that will sequester carbon through policies created past governments. [29] Carbon farming methods volition typically take a cost, meaning farmers and land-owners typically need a style in which they can turn a profit from the utilize of carbon farming and unlike governments volition accept dissimilar programs.[29] Potential sequestration alternatives to carbon farming include scrubbing CO2 from the air with machines (straight air capture); fertilizing the oceans to prompt algal blooms that afterwards death carry carbon to the sea bottom[thirty];storing the carbon dioxide emitted by electricity generation; and crushing and spreading types of rock such equally basalt that absorb atmospheric carbon.[25] Land management techniques that can exist combined with farming include planting/restoring forests, burying biochar produced by anaerobically converted biomass and restoring wetlands. (Coal beds are the remains of marshes and peatlands.)[31]

Wetland restoration [edit]

Estimates of the economic value of blue carbon ecosystems per hectare. Based on 2009 data from UNEP/GRID-Arendal.[32] [33]

Blue carbon is carbon sequestration (the removal of carbon dioxide from the globe'due south atmosphere) by the earth'due south oceanic and coastal ecosystems, mostly by algae, seagrasses, macroalgae, mangroves, salt marshes and other plants in coastal wetlands. This occurs through plant growth and the accumulation and burial of organic matter in the soil. Because oceans cover 70% of the planet, sea ecosystem restoration has the greatest blue carbon development potential. Research is ongoing, but in some cases it has been found that these types of ecosystems remove far more carbon than terrestrial forests, and store it for millennia.

Bioenergy with carbon capture & storage [edit]

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is the process of extracting bioenergy from biomass and capturing and storing the carbon, thereby removing it from the atmosphere.[34] The carbon in the biomass comes from the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (COtwo) which is extracted from the atmosphere by the biomass when it grows. Energy is extracted in useful forms (electricity, heat, biofuels, etc.) as the biomass is utilized through combustion, fermentation, pyrolysis or other conversion methods. Some of the carbon in the biomass is converted to CO2 or biochar which can and then be stored by geologic sequestration or land awarding, respectively, enabling carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and making BECCS a negative emissions technology (NET).[35]

The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic change (IPCC), suggests a potential range of negative emissions from BECCS of 0 to 22 gigatonnes per year.[36] Every bit of 2019[update], five facilities around the earth were actively using BECCS technologies and were capturing approximately 1.five million tonnes per year of COtwo.[37] Wide deployment of BECCS is constrained past cost and availability of biomass.[38] [39]

Biochar [edit]

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. Information technology is created using a process called pyrolysis, which is basically the human activity of high temperature heating biomass in an environment with low oxygen levels. What remains is a textile known as char, similar to charcoal but is made through a sustainable procedure, thus the use of biomass.[forty] Biomass is organic matter produced by living organisms or recently living organisms, most unremarkably plants or constitute based material.[41] A study washed by the United kingdom Biochar Inquiry Eye has stated that, on a conservative level, biochar can store one gigaton of carbon per year. With greater effort in marketing and acceptance of biochar, the benefit could be the storage of five–9 gigatons per year of carbon in biochar soils.[42] [ meliorate source needed ]

Enhanced weathering [edit]

Enhanced weathering is a chemic approach to remove carbon dioxide involving state- or sea-based techniques. One example of a state-based enhanced weathering technique is in-situ carbonation of silicates. Ultramafic rock, for example, has the potential to store from hundreds to thousands of years' worth of CO2 emissions, according to estimates.[43] [44] Body of water-based techniques involve alkalinity enhancement, such as grinding, dispersing, and dissolving olivine, limestone, silicates, or calcium hydroxide to accost body of water acidification and CO2 sequestration.[45] Ane example of a research project on the feasibility of enhanced weathering is the CarbFix project in Iceland.[46] [47] [48]

Direct air capture [edit]

Flow diagram of direct air capture process using sodium hydroxide as the absorbent and including solvent regeneration.

Flow diagram of directly air capture process using sodium hydroxide as the absorbent and including solvent regeneration.

Direct air capture (DAC) is a process of capturing carbon dioxide (COtwo) directly from the ambient air (as opposed to capturing from bespeak sources, such as a cement factory or biomass power plant) and generating a concentrated stream of CO2 for sequestration or utilization or production of carbon-neutral fuel and windgas. Carbon dioxide removal is achieved when ambience air makes contact with chemical media, typically an aqueous alkaline solvent[49] or sorbents.[l] These chemic media are subsequently stripped of CO2 through the application of free energy (namely heat), resulting in a CO2 stream that tin can undergo dehydration and compression, while simultaneously regenerating the chemical media for reuse.

DAC was suggested in 1999 by Klaus S. Lackner and is however in development,[51] [52] though several commercial plants are in operation or planning across Europe and the Us. Large-calibration DAC deployment may be accelerated when connected with economic use cases, or policy incentives.

DAC is not an alternative to traditional, point-source carbon capture and storage (CCS), but can exist used to recapture some emissions from distributed sources, such as some rocket launches.[53] When combined with long-term storage of CO2, DAC can human activity as a carbon dioxide removal tool, although as of 2022[update] information technology has yet to be profitable considering the cost per tonne of carbon dioxide is several times the carbon toll.

Ocean fertilization [edit]

A visualization of flower populations in the North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans from March 2003 to October 2006. The bluish areas are nutrient deficient. Dark-green to yellow show blooms fed by dust blown from nearby landmasses.[54]

Ocean fertilization or ocean nourishment is a type of climate applied science based on the purposeful introduction of nutrients to the upper sea[55] to increase marine food production[56] and to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. A number of techniques, including fertilization past fe, urea and phosphorus, have been proposed. But research in the early 2020s suggested that information technology could only permanently sequester a modest amount of carbon.[57]

Magnesium silicate/oxide in cement [edit]

Lifecycle amounts are non yet fully understood.[19]

Issues [edit]

Economic problems [edit]

The toll of CDR differs substantially depending on the maturity of the engineering science employed every bit well as the economic science of both voluntary carbon removal markets and the physical output; for example, the pyrolysis of biomass produces biochar that has diverse commercial applications, including soil regeneration and wastewater handling.[58] In 2021 DAC cost from $250 to $600 per ton, compared to $100 for biochar and less than $50 for nature-based solutions, such every bit reforestation and afforestation.[59] [60] The fact that biochar commands a higher price in the carbon removal marketplace than nature-based solutions reflects the fact that it is a more durable sink with carbon being sequestered for hundreds or fifty-fifty 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.[61] The Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting states that to be compatible with the Paris Understanding: "…organizations must commit to gradually increment the percentage of carbon removal offsets they procure with the view of exclusively sourcing carbon removals past mid-century."[62] These initiatives along with the evolution of new industry standards for engineered carbon removal, such every bit the Puro Standard, will assist to support the growth of the carbon removal market place.[63]

In 2021, man of affairs Elon Musk announced he was donating $100m for a prize for best carbon capture technology.[64]

Although CDR is not covered past the EU Allowance as of 2021, the European Commission is preparing for carbon removal certification and because carbon contracts for difference.[65] [66] CDR might also in future be added to the Britain Emissions Trading Scheme.[nineteen] As of stop 2021 carbon prices for both these cap-and-trade schemes currently based on carbon reductions, as opposed to carbon removals, remained beneath $100.[67] [68]

Removal of other greenhouse gases [edit]

Although some researchers have suggested methods for removing marsh gas, others say that nitrous oxide would be a better discipline for enquiry due to its longer lifetime in the atmosphere.[69]

Come across also [edit]

  • Carbon dioxide scrubber
  • Carbon-neutral fuel
  • Climate change mitigation scenarios
  • Climate engineering science
  • Listing of emerging technologies
  • Lithium peroxide
  • Low-carbon economy
  • Virgin World Claiming

Bibliography [edit]

  • IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of i.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of i.v°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climatic change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, Due west. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, 10. Zhou, K. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.)].
    • Written report website, chapters I–V
    • Summary for policymakers, 32 pp.
    • Headline statements, 2 pp.
    • Technical summary, 22 pp.
    • FAQ, 24 pp.
    • Glossary, 24 pp.

References [edit]

  1. ^ a b c Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Modify. "Glossary — Global Warming of i.5 ºC". Archived from the original on December 22, 2019. Retrieved February 23, 2020.
  2. ^ a b c "Geoengineering the climate: scientific discipline, governance and uncertainty". The Royal Society. 2009. Archived from the original on October 23, 2019. Retrieved September ten, 2011.
  3. ^ Minx, Jan C; Lamb, William F; Callaghan, Max West; Fuss, Sabine; Hilaire, Jérôme; Creutzig, Felix; Amann, Thorben; Beringer, Tim; De Oliveira Garcia, Wagner; Hartmann, Jens; Khanna, Tarun; Lenzi, Dominic; Luderer, Gunnar; Nemet, Gregory F; Rogelj, Joeri; Smith, Pete; Vicente Vicente, Jose Luis; Wilcox, Jennifer; Del Mar Zamora Dominguez, Maria (2018). "Negative emissions: Part i – research landscape and synthesis" (PDF). Ecology Research Letters. xiii (6): 063001. Bibcode:2018ERL....13f3001M. doi:ten.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b. Archived from the original on March 16, 2020. Retrieved September 13, 2019.
  4. ^ IPCC, 2021: Annex VII: Glossary [Matthews, J.B.R., V. Möller, R. van Diemen, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. MassonDelmotte, C. Méndez, Southward. Semenov, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In Climate change 2021: The Physical Scientific discipline Basis. Contribution of Working Grouping I to the Sixth Cess Study of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, Due south.L. Connors, C. Péan, South. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, One thousand. 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. In Printing. https://world wide web.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Annex_VII.pdf Archived September five, 2021, at the Wayback Auto
  5. ^ Geden, Oliver (May 2016). "An actionable climate target". Nature Geoscience. 9 (5): 340–342. Bibcode:2016NatGe...9..340G. doi:x.1038/ngeo2699. ISSN 1752-0908. Archived from the original on May 25, 2021. Retrieved March 7, 2021.
  6. ^ Schenuit, Felix; Colvin, Rebecca; Fridahl, Mathias; McMullin, Barry; Reisinger, Andy; Sanchez, Daniel L.; Smith, Stephen G.; Torvanger, Asbjørn; Wreford, Anita; Geden, Oliver (March four, 2021). "Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases". Frontiers in Climate. 3: 638805. doi:ten.3389/fclim.2021.638805. ISSN 2624-9553.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h i j g National Academies of Sciences, Engineering (October 24, 2018). Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Inquiry Agenda. ISBN978-0-309-48452-7. Archived from the original on November 20, 2021. Retrieved Feb 22, 2020.
  8. ^ Vergragt, P.J.; Markusson, N.; Karlsson, H. (2011). "Carbon capture and storage, bio-free energy with carbon capture and storage, and the escape from the fossil-fuel lock-in". Global Environmental Change. 21 (2): 282–92. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.020.
  9. ^ Azar, C.; Lindgren, Thou.; Larson, Eastward.; Möllersten, K. (2006). "Carbon Capture and Storage from Fossil Fuels and Biomass – Costs and Potential Office in Stabilizing the Atmosphere". Climatic Modify. 74 (1–iii): 47–79. Bibcode:2006ClCh...74...47A. doi:10.1007/s10584-005-3484-vii. S2CID 4850415.
  10. ^ Page 4-81, IPCC Sixth Assessment Report Working Group 1, 9/8/21, https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/ Archived August 11, 2021, at the Wayback Machine
  11. ^ IPCC15, Ch 2. sfn fault: no target: CITEREFIPCC15 (help)
  12. ^ Obersteiner, Grand.; Azar, Ch; Kauppi, P.; Möllersten, G.; Moreira, J.; Nilsson, S.; Read, P.; Riahi, K.; Schlamadinger, B.; Yamagata, Y.; Yan, J. (October 26, 2001). "Managing Climate Gamble". Science. 294 (5543): 786–787. doi:10.1126/science.294.5543.786b. PMID 11681318. S2CID 34722068.
  13. ^ a b c "SR15 Technical Summary" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December twenty, 2019. Retrieved July 25, 2019.
  14. ^ Anderson, K.; Peters, G. (October xiv, 2016). "The trouble with negative emissions". Science. 354 (6309): 182–183. Bibcode:2016Sci...354..182A. doi:10.1126/science.aah4567. hdl:11250/2491451. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 27738161. S2CID 44896189. Archived from the original on Nov 22, 2021. Retrieved Apr 28, 2020.
  15. ^ IPCC15 & Ch. 2 p. 124. sfn error: no target: CITEREFIPCC15Ch._2_p._124 (help)
  16. ^ Myles, Allen (September 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Net Goose egg Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 2, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  17. ^ "Forests and climate change". IUCN. November 11, 2017. Archived from the original on October 9, 2020. Retrieved October 7, 2020.
  18. ^ "Woods Protection & Climate change: Why Is It Important?". Climate Transform. May thirteen, 2021. Archived from the original on June three, 2021. Retrieved May 31, 2021.
  19. ^ a b c "Greenhouse Gas Removals: Summary of Responses to the Call for Show" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 20, 2021.
  20. ^ Beerling, David (2008). The Emerald Planet: How Plants Changed Earth'southward History. Oxford University Printing. pp. 194–v. ISBN978-0-19-954814-ix.
  21. ^ National Academies Of Sciences, Technology (2019). Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda. Washington, D.C.: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. pp. 45–136. doi:10.17226/25259. ISBN978-0-309-48452-7. PMID 31120708. S2CID 134196575.
  22. ^ Nath, Arun Jyoti; Lal, Rattan; Das, Ashesh Kumar (January 1, 2015). "Managing woody bamboos for carbon farming and carbon trading". Global Environmental and Conservation. three: 654–663. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2015.03.002. ISSN 2351-9894.
  23. ^ "Carbon Farming | Carbon Bike Plant". world wide web.carboncycle.org . Retrieved Apr 27, 2018.
  24. ^ "Carbon Farming: Hope for a Hot Planet – Modern Farmer". Modern Farmer. March 25, 2016. Retrieved April 25, 2018.
  25. ^ a b Velasquez-Manoff, Moises (April 18, 2018). "Can Dirt Salvage the Earth?". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved April 28, 2018.
  26. ^ "Excerpt | The Carbon Farming Solution". carbonfarmingsolution.com . Retrieved April 27, 2018.
  27. ^ Burton, David. "How carbon farming can aid solve climate change". The Chat . Retrieved Apr 27, 2018.
  28. ^ Jindal, Rohit; Eat, Brent; Kerr, John (2008). "Forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in Africa: Potential benefits and challenges". Natural Resources Forum. 32 (two): 116–130. doi:x.1111/j.1477-8947.2008.00176.x. ISSN 1477-8947.
  29. ^ a b Tang, Kai; Kragt, Marit Eastward.; Hailu, Atakelty; Ma, Chunbo (May 1, 2016). "Carbon farming economics: What have we learned?". Journal of Environmental Management. 172: 49–57. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.008. ISSN 0301-4797. PMID 26921565.
  30. ^ Ortega, Alejandra; Geraldi, N.R.; Alam, I.; Kamau, A.A.; Acinas, Southward.; Logares, R.; Gasol, J.; Massana, R.; Krause-Jensen, D.; Duarte, C. (2019). "Important contribution of macroalgae to oceanic carbon sequestration". Nature Geoscience. 12 (9): 748–754. Bibcode:2019NatGe..12..748O. doi:ten.1038/s41561-019-0421-viii. hdl:10754/656768. S2CID 199448971.
  31. ^ Lehmann, Johannes; Gaunt, John; Rondon, Marco (March 1, 2006). "Bio-char Sequestration in Terrestrial Ecosystems – A Review". Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. 11 (2): 403–427. CiteSeerXten.1.1.183.1147. doi:x.1007/s11027-005-9006-5. ISSN 1381-2386. S2CID 4696862.
  32. ^ Nellemann, Christian et al. (2009): Blue Carbon. The Role of Healthy Oceans in Binding Carbon. A Rapid Response Assessment. Arendal, Kingdom of norway: UNEP/Grid-Arendal
  33. ^ Macreadie, P.I., Anton, A., Raven, J.A., Beaumont, N., Connolly, R.1000., Friess, D.A., Kelleway, J.J., Kennedy, H., Kuwae, T., Lavery, P.S. and Lovelock, C.E. (2019) "The future of Blue Carbon science". Nature communications, 10(1): 1–13. doi:ten.1038/s41467-019-11693-w.
  34. ^ Obersteiner, M. (2001). "Managing Climate Risk". Scientific discipline. 294 (5543): 786–7. doi:10.1126/science.294.5543.786b. PMID 11681318. S2CID 34722068.
  35. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering (Oct 24, 2018). Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Calendar. doi:ten.17226/25259. ISBN978-0-309-48452-7. PMID 31120708. S2CID 134196575. Archived from the original on May 25, 2020. Retrieved February 22, 2020.
  36. ^ Smith, Pete; Porter, John R. (July 2018). "Bioenergy in the IPCC Assessments". GCB Bioenergy. 10 (vii): 428–431. doi:10.1111/gcbb.12514.
  37. ^ "BECCS 2019 perspective" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on March 31, 2020. Retrieved June 11, 2019.
  38. ^ Rhodes, James Southward.; Keith, David W. (2008). "Biomass with capture: Negative emissions within social and ecology constraints: An editorial annotate". Climatic Alter. 87 (iii–4): 321–viii. Bibcode:2008ClCh...87..321R. doi:10.1007/s10584-007-9387-4.
  39. ^ Grantham 2019, p. 10 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFGrantham2019 (help)
  40. ^ "What is biochar?". United kingdom Biochar enquiry center. University of Edinburgh Kings Buildings Edinburgh. Archived from the original on October 1, 2019. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  41. ^ "What is Biomass?". Biomass Energy Eye. Straight.gov.united kingdom. Archived from the original on October 3, 2016. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  42. ^ "Biochar reducing and removing CO2 while improving soils: A meaning sustainable response to climate change" (PDF). UKBRC. UK Biochar research Heart. Archived (PDF) from the original on November five, 2016. Retrieved April 25, 2016.
  43. ^ "Maps evidence rocks ideal for sequestering carbon". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 16, 2018. Retrieved May 15, 2018.
  44. ^ U.South. Department of the Interior. "Mapping the Mineral Resources Base for Mineral Carbon-Dioxide Sequestration in the Conterminous U.s." (PDF). U.S. Geological Survey. Data Series 414. Archived (PDF) from the original on July 27, 2020. Retrieved May fifteen, 2018.
  45. ^ "Cloud spraying and hurricane slaying: how ocean geoengineering became the borderland of the climate crunch". The Guardian. June 23, 2021. Archived from the original on June 23, 2021. Retrieved June 23, 2021.
  46. ^ "CarbFix Project | Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute". www.globalccsinstitute.com. Archived from the original on July 3, 2018. Retrieved May 15, 2018.
  47. ^ "The CarbFix Project". www.or.is (in Icelandic). August 22, 2017. Archived from the original on May 16, 2018. Retrieved May 15, 2018.
  48. ^ "Turning Carbon Dioxide Into Rock, and Burying It". The New York Times. February ix, 2015. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on May 16, 2018. Retrieved May 15, 2018.
  49. ^ Keith, David W.; Holmes, Geoffrey; St. Angelo, David; Heide, Kenton (June 7, 2018). "A Procedure for Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere". Joule. 2 (viii): 1573–1594. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2018.05.006.
  50. ^ Beuttler, Christoph; Charles, Louise; Wurzbacher, January (November 21, 2019). "The Role of Direct Air Capture in Mitigation of Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas Emissions". Frontiers in Climate. i: ten. doi:ten.3389/fclim.2019.00010.
  51. ^ Sanz-Pérez, Eloy Due south.; Murdock, Christopher R.; Didas, Stephanie A.; Jones, Christopher W. (Oct 12, 2016). "Direct Capture of carbon dioxide from Ambient Air". Chemic Reviews. 116 (nineteen): 11840–11876. doi:ten.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00173. PMID 27560307.
  52. ^ "Direct Air Capture (Technology Factsheet)" (PDF). Geoengineering Monitor. May 24, 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on August 26, 2019. Retrieved Baronial 27, 2019.
  53. ^ "How the billionaire space race could exist one giant jump for pollution". the Guardian. July 19, 2021. Retrieved February 14, 2022.
  54. ^ NASA Goddard Multimedia Archived 6 March 2016 at the Wayback Auto Accessed June 2012
  55. ^ Matear, R. J. & B. Elliott (2004). "Enhancement of oceanic uptake of anthropogenic CO2 by macronutrient fertilization". J. Geophys. Res. 109 (C4): C04001. Bibcode:2004JGRC..10904001M. doi:10.1029/2000JC000321. Archived from the original on March iv, 2010. Retrieved January 19, 2009.
  56. ^ Jones, I.S.F. & Young, H.Eastward. (1997). "Engineering science a large sustainable globe fishery". Ecology Conservation. 24 (ii): 99–104. doi:x.1017/S0376892997000167.
  57. ^ "Cloud spraying and hurricane slaying: how body of water geoengineering became the frontier of the climate crunch". The Guardian. June 23, 2021. Archived from the original on June 23, 2021. Retrieved June 23, 2021.
  58. ^ "How Republic of finland'southward Puro.globe plans to scale up carbon removal to help the world achieve net nada emissions". European CEO. July one, 2021. Archived from the original on July 1, 2021.
  59. ^ Lebling, Katie; McQueen, Noah; Pisciotta, Max; Wilcox, Jennifer (January 6, 2021). "Direct Air Capture: Resource Considerations and Costs for Carbon Removal". Archived from the original on May xiii, 2021. Retrieved May xiii, 2021.
  60. ^ Brown, James (February 21, 2021). "New Biochar technology a game changer for carbon capture market". The Country. Archived from the original on February 21, 2021. Retrieved December ten, 2021.
  61. ^ Myles, Allen (February 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Net Zippo Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on October 2, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  62. ^ Myles, Allen (September 2020). "The Oxford Principles for Internet Cypher Aligned Carbon Offsetting" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on Oct ii, 2020. Retrieved December x, 2021.
  63. ^ Giles, Jim (February x, 2020). "Carbon markets get real on removal". Archived from the original on February 15, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2021.
  64. ^ @elonmusk (Jan 21, 2021). "Am donating $100M towards a prize for best carbon capture technology" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  65. ^ Tamme, Eve; Brook, Larissa Lee (2021). "European Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy: Current Status and Future Opportunities". Frontiers in Climate. 3: 120. doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.682882. ISSN 2624-9553.
  66. ^ Elkerbout, Milan; Bryhn, Julie. "Setting the context for an EU policy framework for negative emissions" (PDF). Middle for European Policy Studies. Archived (PDF) from the original on Dec 10, 2021.
  67. ^ Evans, Michael (December 8, 2021). "Spotlight: EU carbon cost strengthens to record highs in Nov". www.spglobal.com . Retrieved December x, 2021.
  68. ^ "Pricing Carbon". The World Bank. Archived from the original on June 2, 2014. Retrieved December 20, 2021.
  69. ^ Lackner, Klaus S. (2020). "Practical constraints on atmospheric methane removal". Nature Sustainability. three (5): 357. doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0496-seven. ISSN 2398-9629.

External links [edit]

  • Deep Dives by Carbon180. Info about carbon removal solutions.
  • Krupp, Fred; Keohane, Nathaniel; Pooley, Eric (September 25, 2019). "Less Than Zero; Tin Carbon-Removal Technologies Adjourn Climate Change?". Foreign Diplomacy (March/April 2019): 142–152.
  • The Route to Ten Gigatons - Carbon Removal Scale Up Claiming Game.

brownstue1937.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_removal

0 Response to "What Is the Name of the Process That Plants Use to Remove Carbon From the Atmosphere?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel