It is a while since I posted this, but just your annual reminder that Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) will never scale to compensate all emissions (& it would be a ludicrously expensive alternative to reductions). If you like your money, then the razor-sharp focus would be on reducing emissions! - ThreadSky

glenpeters.bsky.social • 91 days ago

It is a while since I posted this, but just your annual reminder that Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) will never scale to compensate all emissions (& it would be a ludicrously expensive alternative to reductions).

If you like your money, then the razor-sharp focus would be on reducing emissions!

Comments

crewedavid.bsky.social•91 days ago

Yes this myth needs exposing. It surly only has a tiny part to play. Bit like the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

glenpeters.bsky.social•91 days ago

Unless of course, you don't want to reduce you emissions, but just make it look like you want to reduce your emissions.

dominikkeiner.bsky.social•91 days ago

What you are showing is CCS („reduction“ of fossil emissions via negative emissions). CDR is the removal of CO2 in a 100% RE system, achieving net-negative emissions.

danielwilliams965.bsky.social•91 days ago

Carbon-negative biohydrogen is the one CDR that can scale effectively without subsidies. The more you drive, the less carbon dioxide there is

Sargasso sea plenty big enough for carbon dioxide removal

danielwilliams965.bsky.social•91 days ago

Process is simple, effective & profitable

Shouldn't undermine the value of extremely low cost carbon-negative fuels

danielwilliams965.bsky.social•91 days ago

Reading material for you: https://books.google.fr/books/about/Sunlight_and_Seaweed.html?id=LkTcDgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

9haethon.bsky.social•91 days ago

i haven't checked in for over a year now, but the impression i walked away with was that the majority of scenarios and NDCs being used for policymaking were infeasible due to land use changes.

has anything changed?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259033222300547X#sec3

https://landgap.org/2023/update

seesight.bsky.social•91 days ago

With emissions at 0% we then need irrigation at the scale of tectonic plates. Arid agriculture and forestry are needed if we are to plant the 3x Canada's worth od trees required to sink 420ppm back to mid 300s.

rickh07.bsky.social•91 days ago

Hi,
Could you define what is net budget and residual for this graph? What temperature does this result in 2100?
Thanks
Rick H.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply