CO₂-removal News

Media

Geoengineering Monitor: COP21’s climate technofix: spinning carbon into gold and the myth of ‘negative emissions’

„Paris has been awash with hype about ‘CO2 recycling’ and ‘carbon neutral’ or even ‘carbon negative’ technologies based on burning millions of trees, writes Rachel Smolker. But the alchemical notion that waste carbon can be spun into corporate gold is hitting serious reality checks. It’s time to ditch the fantasies and progress the real solutions: like caring for land, soils, forests and grasslands.“

Link

#
Media

The Center for Carbon Removal: 2015 Year in Review: Carbon Removal

„In 2015, it became clearer than ever that industry is going to take serious action over the coming decades to reduce CO2 emissions. But what if businesses could go beyond stopping CO2 emissions, and actually pull more CO2 out of the atmosphere than they emit into it? With carbon removal (aka “negative emissions”) solutions, that vision could one day become a reality. And while building “net-sequestration” companies will be a monumental task, 2015 has seen a number of encouraging signs about the potential for a carbon-removing economy of the future. Here’s a recap of the key milestones around carbon removal from the past year, and what it means for sustainable business in 2016 and beyond.“

Link

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

DeMott, Paul J.; et al. (2015): Sea spray aerosol as a unique source of ice nucleating particles

DeMott, Paul J.; Hill, Thomas C. J.; McCluskey, Christina S.; Prather, Kimberly A.; Collins, Douglas B.; Sullivan, Ryan C. et al. (2015): Sea spray aerosol as a unique source of ice nucleating particles. In PNAS. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1514034112.

„Ice nucleating particles (INPs) are vital for ice initiation in, and precipitation from, mixed-phase clouds. A source of INPs from oceans within sea spray aerosol (SSA) emissions has been suggested in previous studies but remained unconfirmed. Here, we show that INPs are emitted using real wave breaking in a laboratory flume to produce SSA.“

Link

#
Media

FCEA Blog: Building Better Concepts in Climate Engineering: why bother with CDR and SRM?

By Patrick Taylor Smith. „I want to take a step back from the particulars of the conversation between Horton and McLaren and ask the following question: what is the point of drawing—or of failing to draw—a distinction between SRM and CDR? The very question, “Should we treat SRM and CDR the same or different?” presumes that there are useful categories—‘SRM’ and ‘CDR’—that ought to serve as the foundation of our analysis of geoengineering.“

Link

#
Media

Envisionation: Climate Justice? “Let them eat cake!” Discussion: Professor Kevin Anderson & Dr. Hugh Hunt

„In this spontaneous conversation between two of Britain’s most vocal scientists on climate change and engineering, we see a frank analysis of the details that bely inconvenient truths for each one us. Our current carbon pollution rate is taking us towards a planet that is on average 4ºC warmer than today with regional variations far exceeding this and changes to the natural world that will be so profound that it is fair to say, this will not be the same planet.“

Link

#