The State of CDR, V2.0

[Greg Rau]

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/633458017a1ae214f3772c76/t/665ed4d09ec68446e519061c/1717490906424/Chapter+1-The+State+of+Carbon+Dioxide+Removal+2ED.pdf

Hoping it’s and update over V1, but have my doubts based on principles in the intro chapter:

•

Principle 1: The CO2 captured must come from the atmosphere, not from fossil sources (see Box 1.2).

•

Principle 2: The subsequent storage must be durable, such that CO2 is not soon reintroduced to the atmosphere (see Section 1.4).

•

Principle 3: The removal must be a result of human intervention, additional to the Earth’s natural processes.

No problem with 2 and 3, but at least in the case ERW and OAE a significant fraction of CDR here involves reduction of CO2 flux to the atmosphere rather than capture of atmospheric CO2. Might also be a good idea to include a few authors actually doing commercial CDR, just in case they’ve been able to reduce some of the knowledge gaps identified.

Greg

[GRETCHEN & RON LARSON]

Greg and list:

 

     I just did a quick review of this second edition (of June, 2024). Some nice material in the 200+ pages (10 chapters;  about 450 cites).

     My Google AI source says that the third edition is scheduled for this coming May, same UK resource in charge.

     Main emphases on BECCS and DACCS,  a carryover from Edition #1 (of 2023).  

     The biochar portion was OK, showing a biochar lead in some ways, but short on what is happening in China. (I think none of 100 or so authors were from China.)

      It must be very difficult to cover such a broad topic which (at least for biochar) is changing very rapidly.    Re the three principles below,  I doubt any change coming..

     My guess is there is now not a single word on a new biochar application with value seen to users in a few days - not years.  

      But thanks to the many involved in this upcoming update.

 

Ron

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CarbonDioxideRem...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CB44C61D-289E-41E0-AC3B-957641B64B53%40sbcglobal.net.

[Jan Minx]

Dear all,

the next State of CDR report is coming out in early June. We are very aware of the challenges in painting a fully comprehensive picture of the CDR space globally, but we are trying to get better over the years.

You may have seen that we are running a survey jointly with CDR.fyi on carbon removal capacity: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sebastianmanhart_final-call-to-participate-in-the-third-activity-7405578885054164993-5a2E?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAFrt7NQBXSr-aIkwF_bxuW07thEdgL5M8zM

With the International Biochar Initiative and the US Biochar Initiative (we have worked closely with the European Biochar Consortium from the beginning), we are also running the Biochar Industry Survey: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/state-of-carbon-dioxide-removal_what-is-biochar-activity-7374370501634269185-564J?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAFrt7NQBXSr-aIkwF_bxuW07thEdgL5M8zM

This does not mean that we will have perfect data after these, but we are trying hard to provide a fuller picture - to the benefit of all.

But you are also right that it is always challenging to do justice to individual CDR methods in a report that tries to cover all CDR methods globally.

Warm regards,

Jan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/158355345.511972.1768980660837%40connect.xfinity.com.

-- 
Jan Christoph Minx, PhD

Head of Research Group Evidence for Climate Solutions (ECS)
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts Research (PIK)

Torgauer Str. 12-15
10829 Berlin
Germany

[Richard Smith]

This is a great resource. I thought ocean based CDR was further along in development than this document indicates. Are there any more resources I can use for current information? I apologize if this isn't the right place for questions. 

[GRETCHEN & RON LARSON]

Jan and list:

 

   RWL1.   Thanks for your  response and your emphasis on biochar;  I see an opportunity to do the same.   To keep it simple,  I'll stick to just the one attachment figure.   Not sure why biochar is in the fifth row ("fifth place",?)  but the intent must have been to place it close to the top four with the grey (vs orange) color.    I think that OK, but one could argue that biochar could even also be orange.

 

  RWL2.  Another way you could treat biochar a little differently (and more accurately) is the first column of blue colors - and not treat biochar as "novel".   There are relatively minor differences between biochar and charcoal.  Charcoal goes back many thousands of years .And (as biochar) has been used for soil improvement for the same.

 

  RWL3   The middle blue column is dark blue for 9 of the 15 rows- at greater than 9 Gt CO2/yr.  I have seen biochar listed above that future annual production number. There also should be extra credit here for handling methane and N2O.

  

    RWL4    The right-most column is for time duration, with dark blue valid above 10 kyrs.   If the measure were half life, I have seen that for biochar.   

 

    RWL5.   So this might give three dark blue boxes rather than three at middle blue - and thereby be a visual explanation of why it is dominating sales. But I think there is also a missing column - for distinguishing between costs and investments.   The top four are all investments (as biochar can also be), while biochar's chief competitors BECCS and DACS are not.  I urge adding something like that as the main explanator for biochar dominating today's commercial CDR activity.

 

Ron

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/a56600e4-4369-4f15-b610-11e269663f89%40pik-potsdam.de.