Tumgik
#carbon removal
reasonsforhope · 9 months
Note
hey, how do you cope with people saying we only have a small amount of time left to stop the worst effects of climate change? no matter how hopeful and ok i am, that always sends me back into a spiral :(
A few different ways
1. The biggest one is that I do math. Because renewable energy is growing exponentially
Up until basically 2021 to now, all of the climate change models were based on the idea that our ability to handle climate change will grow linearly. But that's wrong: it's growing exponentially, most of all in the green energy sector. And we're finally starting to see proof of this - and that it's going to keep going.
And many types of climate change mitigation serve as multipliers for other types. Like building a big combo in a video game.
Change has been rapidly accelerating and I genuinely believe that it's going to happen much faster than anyone is currently predicting
2. A lot of the most exciting and groundbreaking things happening around climate change are happening in developing nations, so they're not on most people's radars.
But they will expand, as developing nations are widely undergoing a massive boom in infrastructure, development, and quality of life - and as they collaborate and communicate with each other in doing so
3. Every country, state, city, province, town, nonprofit, community, and movement is basically its own test case
We're going to figure out the best ways to handle things in a remarkably quick amount of time, because everyone is trying out solutions at once. Instead of doing 100 different studies on solutions in order, we get try out 100 (more like 10,000) different versions of different solutions simultaneously, and then figure out which ones worked best and why. The spread of solutions becomes infinitely faster, especially as more and more of the world gets access to the internet and other key infrastructure
4. There's a very real chance that many of the impacts of climate change will be reversible
Yeah, you read that right.
Will it take a while? Yes. But we're mostly talking a few decades to a few centuries, which is NOTHING in geological history terms.
We have more proof than ever of just how resilient nature is. Major rivers are being restored from dried up or dead to thriving ecosystems in under a decade. Life bounces back so fast when we let it.
I know there's a lot of skepticism about carbon capture and carbon removal. That's reasonable, some of those projects are definitely bs (mostly the ones run by gas companies, involving carbon credits, and/or trying to pump CO2 thousands of feet underground)
But there's very real potential for carbon removal through restoring ecosystems and regenerative agriculture
The research into carbon removal has also just exploded in the past three years, so there are almost certainly more and better technologies to come
There's also some promising developments in industrial carbon removal, especially this process of harvesting atmospheric CO2 and other air pollution to make baking soda and other industrially useful chemicals
As we take carbon out of the air in larger amounts, less heat will be trapped in the atmosphere
If less heat is trapped in the atmosphere, then the planet will start to cool down
If the planet starts to cool down, a lot of things will stabilize again. And they'll probably start to stabilize pretty quickly
5K notes · View notes
Text
The U.S. political right wing does not have an answer to climate change. Neither does the technocratic and centrist net-zero discourse, which has failed to achieve adequate reductions, as will become increasingly apparent within just a few years. With no one else driving the agenda, the left needs to offer an alternative, sector-by-sector roadmap for decarbonization. We need to fill the voids in leadership, analysis, planning, organizing, and coalition-building. Rather than focusing on particular technologies, we need to be setting objectives for the areas in which these technologies could be used. If we put forward both best-use cases for CCS and alternatives to CCS, we are more likely to avoid bad CCS projects—and we can play a leading role rather than a defensive one. 
[...]
It’s true that we need a robust climate movement to block truly harmful projects that would lock in new fossil fuel infrastructure or violate Indigenous sovereignty, and it is critical to support communities in this work. But it would be a mistake to narrowly focus climate organizing on reenacting successful infrastructure-blocking tactics in ways that fail to discern useful industrial carbon projects from bad ones.  Such an approach puts the climate movement into a reactive role just when climate advocates need to be the ones who plan the energy transition. Taking a wider-strategy approach to CCS will take patience. It will require building broader coalitions and organizing in rural areas where a lot of decarbonization needs to happen. It will be challenging—but the cost of being absorbed by the CCS distraction is not one that the movement can afford.
176 notes · View notes
wachinyeya · 2 months
Text
32 notes · View notes
appalachianfuturism · 2 years
Text
“So I was pleasantly surprised when I met the leaders of Running Tide earlier this month. Far from having a hippie-dippie-ish enthusiasm about kelp, they spoke like engineers, aware of the immense scale of carbon removal that stands before them. While much of Running Tide's science remains unvetted, the researchers seem to be thinking about all the right problems in all the right ways—approaching carbon removal as an organization-level problem rather than a one-off process.
At its core, carbon removal is “a mass-transfer problem,” Marty Odlin, Running Tide’s CEO, told me. The key issue is how to move the hundreds of gigatons of carbon emitted by fossil fuels from the “fast cycle,” where carbon flits from fossil fuels to the air to plant matter, back to the “slow cycle,” where they remain locked away in geological storage for millennia. “How do you move that?” Odlin said. “What’s the most efficient way possible to accomplish that mass transfer?” The question is really, really important. The United Nations recently said that carbon removal is “essential” to remedying climate change, but so far, we don’t have the technology to do it cheaply and at scale.
Odlin, who comes from a Maine fishing family and went to college for robotics, founded Running Tide in 2017 on the theory that the ocean, which covers two-thirds of the planet’s surface, would be essential to carbon removal. At least for now, the key aspect of Running Tide’s system is its buoys. Each buoy is made of reclaimed waste wood, limestone, and kelp seedlings, materials that are meant to address the climate problem in some way: The wood represents forest carbon that would otherwise be thrown out or incinerated, the limestone helps reverse ocean acidification, and, most important, the kelp grows ultrafast, absorbing carbon from the land and sea. Eventually, the buoy is meant to break down, with the limestone dissolving and the wood and kelp drifting to the bottom of the seafloor…”
539 notes · View notes
shreygoyal · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
View on Twitter
“The challenge with our CO₂ emissions is that even if we get to zero, the world doesn’t cool back down.”
(Source)
3 notes · View notes
redshift-13 · 2 years
Link
5 notes · View notes
rjzimmerman · 2 years
Link
Excerpt from this story from Inside Climate News:
Occidental Petroleum is planning to build a series of massive industrial projects in Texas that would be capable of pulling tens of millions of tons of carbon dioxide out of the air, and is seeking substantial state tax breaks to help finance the operations.
The proposals, which the company has not discussed publicly, outline what would be the first commercial-scale operations of a long-shot technology that is gaining increased attention from governments and corporations for its potential to help curb climate change.
In recent months, Occidental has applied for property tax abatements in two Texas counties that could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars if it completes the projects, according to an Inside Climate News analysis of the filings.
The applications include new details about the scale of the company’s planned investments in carbon removal—potentially tens of billions of dollars over the next decade—and fresh insight into how the oil company is trying to finance these plans by assembling a package of federal and state tax breaks, climate incentives, a burgeoning corporate market for carbon offsets and even through the sale of oil.
Some policy experts and scientists say technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the air could one day play a small but important role in helping the world achieve the Paris Agreement’s ambitious climate targets of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. These efforts remain prohibitively expensive, however, a fact that is underscored by Occidental’s applications, which say the projects cannot move forward without taxpayer support.
Carbon removal has also generated controversy within the environmental advocacy community. Some activists are concerned that the technologies could be used as an excuse to weaken efforts to cut emissions from fossil fuels. Many also say that the technologies, which have tremendous energy demands, could have their own damaging environmental impacts.
Virginia Palacios is the executive director of Commission Shift, a Texas advocacy group that has raised concerns about the state’s oversight of oil and gas wells and, potentially, of underground injection of carbon dioxide.
“I think it’s kind of absurd,” she said of the possibility that Occidental could receive the state tax abatements. “Because it’s supposed to be a public benefit, but ultimately it’s a private company that’s going to be making lots of money.”
6 notes · View notes
poojagblog-blog · 10 days
Text
The global Direct Air Capture Market is expected to grow from an estimated USD 62 million in 2023 to USD 1,727 million by 2030, at a CAGR of 60.9% during the 2023–2030 period according to a new report by MarketsandMarkets™. Direct Air Capture provides a pathway to offset emissions that cannot be entirely eliminated. Direct air capture technology is known for its unique technology which directly captures CO2 from the ambient air, which is poised to play a pivotal role in the carbon removal process. Countries across the globe are putting efforts to reduce their carbon emission to meet the net-zero emission goals. Direct Air Capture (DAC) systems exhibit adaptability in their deployment, capable of being implemented across diverse scales and geographical locations. This inherent flexibility contributes to the versatility of DAC technology, allowing for customization to suit the specific magnitude of emissions and regional needs.
0 notes
in0ctobercountry · 20 days
Text
Tumblr media
0 notes
Text
Red Trail Energy and Puro.earth Spearhead Carbon Removal in Ethanol Production
Key Takeaways First Ethanol Facility to Generate CORCs: Red Trail Energy, LLC (RTE) partners with Puro.earth to issue the first Carbon Dioxide Removal Certificates (CORCs) from an ethanol production facility in the voluntary carbon market (VCM), marking a significant industry milestone. Largest Durable Carbon Removal Project: RTE’s project has become the largest registered durable carbon removal…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
0 notes
catgolin · 4 months
Text
It seems weird to me that companies are allowed to spend money just to say that they are "carbon-neutral." I know it's funding these companies that actually are working to fix our climate crisis but it still rubs me the wrong way that companies can just pay someone to clean up their mess and still take all the credit.
1 note · View note
dsiddhant · 5 months
Text
The global Carbon Offset/Carbon Credit Market is expected to grow from an estimated USD 414.8 billion in 2023 to USD 1,602.7 billion by 2028, at a CAGR of 31.0% during the forecast period.
0 notes
Link
It’s simply not possible to fully “offset” billions of tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions from burning of coal, oil and gas by regrowing forests, increasing the amount of carbon in soils or other measures.
That’s because the carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels is fundamentally different to the way carbon is stored above ground in trees, wetlands and in the soil.
[...]
When we burn fossil fuels, we release carbon locked away for millions of years (hence “fossil” fuels), pumping vast new volumes of carbon into the active carbon cycle. This is very clearly altering the balance of carbon in the Earth system and faster than ever recorded in the Earth’s geological history. Planting trees does not lock carbon away again deep underground. Instead, the introduced fossil carbon remains part of the active carbon cycle.
[...]
We all want our comfortable lives to continue with a minimum of change. Offsets seem to deliver that. But all they really do is offset our guilt and responsibility. They cannot solve the central problem which is that every year, we add another 33 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.
The atmosphere doesn’t respond to good intentions or clever schemes. All it responds to is the volume of greenhouse gases which trap ever more heat.
151 notes · View notes
fcfindia · 10 months
Text
Use of ESG Investing
By considering ESG(Environmental, Social, and Governance)  factors alongside financial metrics, investors can gain deeper insights into a company's long-term value, risk management practices. ESG investing can be used to construct investment portfolios that align with an investor's values and sustainability objectives.
Tumblr media
0 notes
books4coffee · 10 months
Text
Africa & Carbon Removal 2023
In 2023, carbon removal has been a significant focus in the global effort to combat climate change. One notable event is the 2023 OpenAir Carbon Removal Challenge (1). This worldwide challenge invited students to develop innovative processes, approaches, and prototypes to remove carbon from the atmosphere. This initiative demonstrates the interest and commitment to finding effective solutions for…
View On WordPress
0 notes
dbunicorn · 1 year
Text
0 notes