Carbon Dioxide Removal: Mineralization | Climate Now Ep. 2.7
Ғылым және технология
There are several methods of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere - both natural and technological - and each method has its tradeoffs.
Carbon mineralization is the most secure option for #carbondioxideremoval (CDR) as it permanently sequesters CO2 in the crystal structure of minerals.
But the natural mineralization process is too slow to keep pace with the rate of manmade #CO2emissions. So scientists are finding ways to speed up the process.
In Climate Now's latest episode of our series on carbon dioxide removal strategies, we explore how the #mineralization process works and how it can be enhanced to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere on a large scale to help mitigate climate change.
Chapters:
00:00 - Mineralization for Carbon Dioxide Removal
01:54 - How Mineralization Works
04:20 - How to Enhance Mineralization
06:45 - Mineralization Strategies: Ex Situ
08:30 - Pol Knops and Green Minerals
09:50 - Enhanced Weathering
11:15 - Mineralization Strategies: In Situ (Carbfix example)
Who is Climate Now?
Climate Now is an educational multimedia platform that produces expert-led, accessible, in-depth podcast and video episodes addressing the climate crisis and its solutions, explaining the science, technologies and key economic and policy considerations at play in the global effort to decarbonize our energy system and larger economy.
Subscribe to the Climate Now newsletter: bit.ly/3Fnwqgo
Follow us on social media
Twitter: / weareclimatenow
LinkedIn: / climatenow
Facebook: / weareclimatenow
Instagram: / weareclimatenow
Click here for a complete list of sources: bit.ly/32nV8Px
Transcript:
10 billion tonnes a year. That is how much carbon dioxide we will likely need to remove from the atmosphere every year by 2050 to avoid catastrophic changes to our climate. By 2100, we will need to remove 20 billion tons per year. And we have some choices in how we remove this CO2, as we describe in our introductory video on Carbon Dioxide Removal. But the technique we choose will invariably require a trade-off:
We can choose the most cost-efficient options, or we can choose those methods that will come with the strongest guarantee of long-term CO2 storage. In this video, we focus on the most secure of CDR options: Mineralization.
Mineralization is like the holy grail of CDR technologies because it traps CO2 into the crystal structure of minerals, thereby permanently sequestering it from the atmosphere. Every other proposed reservoir for CO2 storage comes with some risk of impermanence:
Forests can burn or be destroyed by pests. Soils that are cultivated to hold more CO2 will lose it again if land users revert to earlier, more destructive practices.
Even storage of CO2 in the pore spaces of underground geologic formations could escape through abandoned wells or along fractures in the rocks.
But with mineralization, CO2 becomes a part of a rock. There is nearly zero risk of it being re-released to the atmosphere. So let’s dig deeper into the technology - how does it work? And how feasible is it to develop this method as a major pillar of carbon dioxide removal?
Removing CO2 from the atmosphere through mineralization is NOT a novel technique. In fact, it is as old as the Earth itself. Mineralization is the primary mechanism by which the planet regulates atmospheric CO2 over timescales of millions of years.
Whenever it rains, CO2 in the atmosphere reacts with water in raindrops, forming a compound called carbonic acid.
As the rain lands on Earth’s surface, the carbonic acid reacts with exposed rocks, slowly dissolving the minerals by breaking them down into their metal components. Those dissolved components then get carried by runoff and river water, and are ultimately released into the ocean. And because seawater has a slightly basic pH, when these dissolved metals enter the ocean, they react with carbon dioxide in the ocean to form a carbonate mineral, trapping the CO2 into the mineral structure...
Full Transcript: bit.ly/3yU0JsA
Пікірлер: 32
This needs WAY more views
There is another form of in situ mineralization method that you missed. Mineral accretion through electrolysis. This is currently used to repair damaged coral reefs or to create new ones. Each site can store hundreds of tones of co2 in the form of calcium and magnesium carbonate. It can be done at a negative cost, as the areas where it is done become marine nurseries that help reverse diminishing fish stocks. These improved fish stocks can then be carefully managed to create a sustainable fishing industry. Having a sustainable fishing industry, helps reduce the need for an ever increasing growth in the production of land based meat. Again, in turn helping the environment.
The twin aspect of carbon sequestration in my view is called: ENERGY. If it ends up being that we have to reverse the chemical process being done for the last few centuries (C+O=CO2+energy), then we might need amounts of energy orders of magnitude above what we have today. That is what we sould be putting resources into right now: RESEARCH (instead of aberrations such as wars).
Enhanced weathering is the way to go. Focus on pinelands and rice paddies and other acidic soils. Dump GT of ultra maffic rock powder. I was both a farmer and a petroleum geologist so I can say the following: (1) spreading stuff on fields costs $$$- better to do it large quantities on small areas that are acidic and leave it to break down over time and (2) insitu will not work. Basalt is a very low porosity facies. You can store very small quantities in fractures but they will quickly mineralize and then you are basically trying to frac an ultra tight rock. This will only work in very specific locations with fractured basalt. I reckon that if coal can be mined, shipped around the World, powdered and burned in boilers for $100/t than ultra maffic rock can be surface quarried and powdered for a similar cost. Permanently storing carbon through enhanced weathering for $150/t is the best solution there is. This is a geological problem it requires a geological solution.
@handlethejandal
4 ай бұрын
How do you deal with the elevated Ni and Cr in ultramafics? I can see that being a sticking point
@christopherglover5945
4 ай бұрын
@@handlethejandal maybe for agricultural lands you would prefer to use grantic source rock to reduce this risk. I think in pinelands of the American SE or deforested tropical soils prior to reforestation that would be less of a concern. The problem with ocean weathering is oceans are already basic. Lickens excrete formic acid to precipitate weathering of granite and it exponentially accelerates the breakdown of chemical bonds.
It sounds like reaching the target quantity of sequestered CO2 is going to require multiple industries and many groups all contributing together. So it's not a question of finding the one and only way to accomplish things. Every little bit that can be contributed is needed. I'm currently in development of a capture method. The trouble I'm having is scale. The process I'm part of could theoretically solve climate change, but might take a few trillion to do so. That would be fine with me, but I don't have a few trillion laying around. I might be wrong on the numbers, it might cost an order of magnitude less than that. If it does, then all the better. : )
@StrengthInSpirit
Жыл бұрын
HI! May I ask what could be your solution? I am also in the process of developing such a company to fight climate change. Greetings from Canada! :)
@jackovoltraids5937
Жыл бұрын
@@StrengthInSpirit I generally support open-source sharing of information, but at this time I'm not ready to give it all away and it would need more of an explanation than I'm willing to spend time summarizing today. Sorry about that. If you have an email I can send you a little about it though.
Regarding Geothermal in the last section, The price and locations have changed due to the ability to cheaply 'bore' through rock and especially near plants that use fossil fuel which will be used to provide the actual conversion of heat to electricity at a very low cost and its available 24/7 over the life time of the earth. Also, it can be set up in all parts of the world - major change, So actually there will be almost no need for fossil fuels, bios, etc, except to wheel out an old gas guzzling 4,5 or 6 litre for 'show' purposes from time to time :P
great!
so what should co2 be 200 ,400, what should it be
Reduction of carbon emission is still the way to go
Making artificial limestone is good because it finds use as a building material & several agro compounds. This 2ndry product will help offset the cost of retrofitting gear for carbon capture.
Esse ativo mineral so sera regulado quando tiver 2 mercados na bolsa de valores e bancos . Para operar as emissoes conforme o andar da economia e da biosfera .
Rita Solari Inko-Tariah Greetings from Nigeria
Definitely we need to solve economics first, to decarbonization of the planet
Nice vid!
@climatecraze
2 жыл бұрын
Problem is ... there is no climate emergency and we are in a CO2 famine ... kzread.info/dash/bejne/hICis9FxnJCoeMY.html
Rita Solari Inko-Tariah from Nigeria
So maybe making the oceans less acidic so the ocean water can absorb more carbon from rain water 🤔
@handlethejandal
4 ай бұрын
☝️ ocean liming is the only way that I foresee us making a dent. My understanding is that ocean liming is net negative so we can start it today without carbon CCS at the lime factory. Down the track we can improve the process with CCS and electrification of the process with low emissions generation. Also has the political benefit that willing and able countries can fund it and we don’t have to argue with developing countries about decarbonisation as urgently as we do at the moment. There is not much chat about this tech. Fe ocean seeding gets more airtime but looks like a non-starter due to the risk of algae blooms and subsequent anoxic oceans.
Each of our air-conditioners move tons of air everyday during the summer months, so I think we could fit them all with C02 filters and the CO2 could be taken with our trash each week. After the CO2 is picked up they can use whatever works best to permanently trap it.
Enhanced weathering of mining waste (containing calcium, magnesium and iron) is a no brainer. Especially when a lot of mining waste isn’t toxic. And of that which is… A lot what makes mining waste toxic (e.g Pb) is becoming valuable to extract, and besides Australia & Africa has plenty of very hot, very unpleasant deserts, where very little of value lives (far better to hamper the lives of scorpions than the entire planet). I think this carbon capture technology is just waiting, for the right kind of Carbon Credit investor.
plant more crops, duh!
@handlethejandal
4 ай бұрын
So you can eat the crops and return the carbon to the atmosphere via your lungs and b*tt? Permanent storage dude
What's with the creepy, mysterious music? Is this witchcraft? I'm out.