CO₂-removal News

Slate: Can We Achieve the Paris Climate Goals Without Unproven Technology?

„Significantly, the Paris accords already contain a nod to such interventions, encoding it in the awkwardly worded recognition of “removals by sinks of greenhouse gases.” Here, a “sink” is a system that pulls gasses out of the air and sequesters them. There are many ways of producing carbon sinks, including the time-honored tradition of growing forests. But this approach is a slow one, especially in relation to the timeline that the Paris accords establish. In effect, then, this phrase could be read as an acknowledgment[nbsp]of the need to try out other techniques—and to do so posthaste.“

Link

van Vuuren, Detlef P.; et al. (2015): Implications of long-term scenarios for medium-term targets (2050)

van Vuuren, Detlef P.; van Sluisveld, Mariësse; Hof, Andries F. (2015): Implications of long-term scenarios for medium-term targets (2050). PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.

Report with afforestation (3.5) and negative emissions (4). „If fast and substantial reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is postponed further, there are fewer options available to stay below a 2 °C warming at the end of the century. Delayed action is likely to require measures that remove CO2 from the atmosphere by planting forests and/or using bioenergy in combination with carbon capture and storage in order to meet the 2 °C target. The latter technique still involves considerable challenges. Climate policy decisions in the next years are therefore likely to have long-term implications.“

Link

Tomei, Julia; Helliwell, Richard (2015): Food versus fuel? Going beyond biofuels

Tomei, Julia; Helliwell, Richard (2015): Food versus fuel? Going beyond biofuels. In Land Use Policy. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.11.015[nbsp]

„In this paper, we use the debate on food versus fuel as a lens to examine the interdependencies between the multiple end-uses of feedstocks and the multifunctionality of land. Revealing a more nuanced understanding of the realities of agricultural networks, land use conflicts and the values of the people managing land, we argue that the simplification achieved by food versus fuel, although effective in generating public resonance that has filtered into political response, has failed to capture much that is at the heart of the issue.“

Link

The Conversation: Paris emissions cuts aren’t enough – we’ll have to put carbon back in the ground

„To stabilise temperatures at any level, be it 1.5℃, 2℃ or even 3℃, net carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced to zero. Most governments, environmental groups and business leaders now understand this. And it is acknowledged, albeit implicitly, in Article 4 of the Paris agreement, which calls for greenhouse emissions to be “balanced” by carbon sinks some time after mid-century.“

Link

New Internationalist Blog: Geoengineering: a boon for big business not the environment

„The terms ‘net zero emissions’, ‘negative emissions’, ‘climate neutrality’ and ‘greenhouse gas emissions neutral’ are the current euphemisms for geoengineering.(vi) These terms are used in the COP21 negotiating text and are distinguished from decarbonisation and other terms that refer specifically to reducing fossil fuel use.(vii) They are bandied about as though the technologies to achieve zero or negative emissions are mature and proven. They are not even close, but geoengineering is an absolutely critical component to the fallacy of a business as usual solution to climate change.“

Link