What is the best framework to consider possible approaches to carbon removal?

XPRIZEXPRIZE Los Angeles, CaliforniaPosts: 193 admin
In trying to lay out the "framework" for different approaches to carbon removal, we've been impressed by the framework laid out in the National Academies study (link here).

Is this the best framework, or are there others we should be considering?

Does anyone know why the National Academies study left out "oceans" as a category? Any opinions about this?

Share any links, ideas, or thoughts!

Comments

  • DanSelzDanSelz Los AngelesPosts: 60 admin
    Yeah, I know I was very confused as to why oceans as a category seemed to be excluded from the National Academies of Science report. They simply say that oceans "fell outside of the scope" of the report, but I'm very curious as to why oceans weren't included in the scope in the first place. Does anyone have insights as to why?
  • jiwlpjiwlp Posts: 2 ✭✭
    Greg Rau and I did a brief piece for The Conversation today on one option, ocean alkalinization, and I'm published a long report on an array of ocean options, with a legal focus, for the Centre for International Governance Innovation, should be out in May. And, there's also GESAMP's major new study on marine geoengineering, which was published today. wil

    The Conversation piece can be found at: theconversation.com/can-we-tweak-marine-chemistry-to-help-stave-off-climate-change-93174?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=facebookbutton&fbclid=IwAR3tPw5Uqh5zgkVSyy431eenqVx2-vdJ_9YEBs7xOOqj1-9m8-OKC_LGrBE
  • DanSelzDanSelz Los AngelesPosts: 60 admin
    Hi @jiwlp (Wil), thanks so much for the link to the converation piece, really interesting stuff on alkalinization in there!! What are your thoughts on ocean or coastal based CDR? I myself am particularly interested in CDR potential of things like mangroves or kelp, particularly if they could be combined with a BECCs like approach. Other interesting links you could recommend for an admittedly non-technical person like myself?
  • peterkpeterk Posts: 7 ✭✭
    hi, this is Peter Kelemen. Please see my post on the National Academies study in the related discussion on that topic.
  • StefanieSimpsonStefanieSimpson Posts: 1 ✭✭
    HI, As to your question of why oceans were left out - this is likely a jurisdictional/impact consideration. When we look at climate solutions, having a managing jurisdiction is important so that we can impact real change that results in reduced atmospheric GHGs. Oceans are important of course, but it would take a global collaboration to enact real impacts (and time is of the essence when addressing climate change.)
  • DanSelzDanSelz Los AngelesPosts: 60 admin
    Hi @StefanieSimpson , thanks for your pos about jurisdictions. One argument we've heard is that the open ocean (i.e. ocean zones outside of the jursidiction of any nation) might be an ideal place for CDR technologies since they could avoid some of the permitting/right of use issues that have constrained some more coastal efforts. Obviously there are massive logistical and technological challenges with operating tens of miles from shore, but do you think this might be a viable option?
  • bhaskarmvbhaskarmv Posts: 24 ✭✭
    Hi @DanSelz

    There are no logistical and technological challenges with operating tens of miles from shore.

    Fishing trawlers from Norway and Japan sail to Southern Ocean off Antarctica to catch fish and whales. These trawling fleets have ships with nets to catch fish, processing ships and cargo vessels to carry the fish back.

    Any Ocean based Carbon Capture solution will use infrastructure similar to these fishing fleets and one result of the solution would be to grow more fish, since converting Athropogenic CO2 into fish biomass / food, is a very good solution.

    If we have developed technology, engineering, business to catch fish,
    we ought to be able to develop technology and engineering to grow fish in Oceans in an economical manner.
  • bhaskarmvbhaskarmv Posts: 24 ✭✭
    Any Ocean based solution should first be tested in Coastal waters, then permission of only one country would be required.

    Fish in most coastal waters has declined in the past few decades, so most countries would be happy to use any solution that restores fish.

    Once technology is proven in Coastal waters, it can be used in deep ocean / international waters.
  • NickAzerNickAzer Portland, OR, USAPosts: 219 ✭✭
    Thank you guys for all your feedback! And thank you @bhaskarmv and @peterk for your comments in the new Prize Design discussions. @StefanieSimpson and @jiwlp, if you had any comments on our first Prize Design Concept, your thoughts there would also be really valuable!
Sign In or Register to comment.