If the authors are advocating that direct CO2 removal from air occurs via the alkalinity generated, this fails to appreciate that the alkalinity is already fully carbonated via respiration CO2 in the sediments. The CDR efficiency then relates to how well this C is retained by the OAE, not by the efficiency with which CO2 is drawn from air by the alkalinity. The initial air capture is done upstream by the seaweed photosynthesis, and it is the prevention of the return air of this C (via the conversion of resp CO2 to alkaline C) that effects the CDR. However, given that anerobic respiration of biomass is much lower/slower than the aerobic case, won't the bulk of the CDR be occurring via undecomposed biomass storage? Also, what about elevated GHG (CH4, N2O etc) production under anaerobiosis? More generally why not advocate for greater anerobic storage of marine biomass of whatever source to reduce/circumvent respiration CO2 returning to air, thus effecting CDR (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2023AV000950 )? In any case, given the complexities, the MRV will not be a trivial exercise?
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/701550509.7475897.1768157461214%40mail.yahoo.com.