Can carbon capture ACTUALLY work?
Summary
TLDRThe video explores carbon capture technology, highlighting its potential in combating climate change. It traces the origins of carbon capture back to the US Navy's use in submarines and space shuttles. Modern applications include industrial plants in India that capture CO2 and convert it into useful products. The script discusses two main methods: point source capture at pollution sources and direct air capture. It emphasizes the need for government incentives to scale up this technology, which is currently costly. The video also raises concerns about the involvement of oil companies in carbon capture, as it can be used to extract more oil, potentially prolonging fossil fuel dependency.
Takeaways
- 🌿 **Carbon Capture Technology**: The script discusses the importance of carbon capture technology, which is essential for meeting climate targets and slowing down climate change.
- 🚀 **Historical Roots**: The concept of carbon capture is not new; it originated from the US Navy's use of CO2 scrubbers in submarines and space shuttles.
- 🌍 **Global Implementation**: There are currently hundreds of pilot projects and over 50 large-scale plants worldwide engaged in carbon capture, with more potential for growth.
- 🌱 **Point Source Capture**: Carbon can be captured directly at the source of pollution, such as coal-burning factories, and then utilized or stored.
- 🌬️ **Direct Air Capture**: This method involves using large fans to draw in air and capture CO2, with 15 plants currently operational globally.
- 🔄 **Carbon Utilization**: Captured CO2 can be repurposed for various uses, including the production of soda ash, heating greenhouses, or even as a fuel.
- 💸 **Economic Incentives**: The scaling of carbon capture technology requires financial incentives, such as government credits or a market for trading captured CO2.
- 🇳🇴 **Norwegian Tax Model**: Norway's pollution tax has successfully incentivized companies to capture carbon, demonstrating a viable economic model.
- ⛽ **Oil Industry Connection**: Ironically, many carbon capture and sequestration companies collaborate with oil companies, which can use the captured CO2 for enhanced oil recovery.
- 🌱 **Trees vs. Tech**: While trees are natural carbon suckers, they are limited by space, water needs, and the risk of being cut down, making technological solutions more scalable.
- 🔮 **Future Outlook**: Experts are optimistic about the future of carbon capture, with predictions of significant cost reductions and increased removal rates by 2030.
Q & A
What is the current issue with carbon dioxide emissions?
-We are currently pumping too much carbon dioxide into the air, which contributes to climate change.
How does carbon capture technology work on a large scale?
-Modern carbon capture technology works like a large-scale CO2 scrubber. Polluted air is sucked into an industrial system, cleaned, and the CO2 is absorbed by a liquid solvent, processed, and either used to make products or stored.
What is the purpose of the CO2 scrubber used in submarines and space shuttles?
-The CO2 scrubber in submarines and space shuttles is used to clear the air inside by removing CO2 from the breath of soldiers and astronauts to prevent toxic levels from building up.
What is the concept of 'point source capture' in carbon capture?
-Point source capture refers to the process of capturing CO2 right at the source of pollution, such as a factory that burns coal, and diverting it to an adjoining facility for use or storage.
How does direct air capture differ from point source capture?
-Direct air capture involves using large fans to suck large amounts of polluted air directly out of the atmosphere, as opposed to capturing CO2 at the source of emissions.
Why is carbon capture considered 'carbon neutral' even if CO2 is emitted again?
-Carbon capture is considered 'carbon neutral' because the CO2 captured and later emitted has not added to the CO2 that would have entered the air from other sources.
What is the difference between 'carbon neutral' and 'carbon negative'?
-Carbon neutral refers to processes that do not add to the CO2 in the atmosphere, while carbon negative refers to processes that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere, such as sequestration.
Why is it important to start removing CO2 from the atmosphere now according to Julio Friedmann?
-Julio Friedmann, an expert on carbon capture, emphasizes the need to start removing CO2 now because in the next 30 years, we have to start removing about 10 billion tons of CO2 every year to meet climate targets.
What are the financial incentives needed to scale up the carbon capture industry?
-To scale up the carbon capture industry, financial incentives such as government credits for CO2 removal, trading captured CO2 at a good market price, and taxing polluters are needed.
Why are big oil companies involved in carbon capture and sequestration?
-Big oil companies are involved because they own assets like old oil fields that are ideal for storing CO2. Additionally, sequestration can increase pressure in the ground, making it easier to extract more oil through a process called enhanced oil recovery.
What are the concerns regarding the role of big oil companies in carbon capture?
-The concern is that fossil fuel companies can continue to emit CO2, and carbon capture might only address a fraction of their pollution. This could extend the life of fossil fuels and delay the transition to cleaner energy sources.
What is the role of public support and government incentives in advancing carbon capture technology?
-Public support and government incentives are crucial for advancing carbon capture technology by ensuring a combination of incentives for non-oil companies, taxing polluters, and pricing CO2 higher, which can help drive innovation and adoption.
Outlines
🌿 Carbon Capture Technology: Reviving an Old Idea
The paragraph introduces the concept of carbon capture technology, which aims to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels by capturing and storing it underground. It highlights the urgency of climate scientists who believe that without such technology, we cannot achieve our climate goals. The origins of carbon capture are traced back to its use by the US Navy in submarines and space shuttles to maintain air quality. Modern applications involve large-scale plants that use fans to draw in polluted air, which is then cleaned by a liquid solvent that absorbs CO2. This CO2 can be repurposed for various uses, including as a fuel. The paragraph also discusses two main methods of carbon capture: point source capture at pollution sources and direct air capture from the atmosphere. The technology is considered 'carbon neutral' if the CO2 is reused, but 'carbon negative' when it is sequestered underground, actively removing carbon from the atmosphere.
💸 The Economics and Challenges of Carbon Capture
This paragraph delves into the financial and logistical challenges of scaling up carbon capture technology. It notes the high costs associated with Direct Air Capture, which currently stands at over $200 per ton of CO2 removed. The industry's growth is hindered by the need for better financial incentives, such as government credits for carbon removal or a market where captured CO2 can be traded at a profitable price. The paragraph also discusses the role of taxes on polluting companies as a potential incentive. Norway's success with a pollution tax is highlighted, along with the safe and virtually limitless potential of underground sequestration. However, the paragraph points out the paradoxical relationship between carbon capture companies and big oil companies, which are often the storage sites for captured CO2 and benefit from enhanced oil recovery. The paragraph concludes with a call for a balanced approach to carbon capture, emphasizing the need for public support and government incentives to ensure the technology is used responsibly and effectively.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Carbon Dioxide
💡Carbon Capture
💡Direct Air Capture
💡Sequestration
💡Carbon Neutral
💡Point Source Capture
💡Enhanced Oil Recovery
💡Carbon Credits
💡Carbon Pricing
💡Climate Change Mitigation
Highlights
The concept of carbon capture and storage is crucial for meeting climate targets, as highlighted by climate scientists.
Carbon capture technology, though modern, has its roots in the US Navy's use for clearing CO2 from submarines and space shuttles.
Modern carbon capture operates on a large scale, similar to the CO2 scrubbers used in spacecraft, with industrial applications in plants like the one in South India.
The process of carbon capture involves drawing polluted air through fans, cleaning it, and using a liquid solvent to absorb CO2 before releasing clean air.
CO2 captured can be repurposed to make products like soda ash, used to heat greenhouses, or even as a fuel, showcasing its versatility.
Point source capture is a method where CO2 is captured directly at the source of pollution, such as coal-burning factories.
Direct air capture involves large fans that draw in atmospheric CO2, with 15 plants currently operational worldwide.
Carbon capture is considered 'carbon neutral' as it recycles CO2 that would have otherwise been emitted.
Sequestration, or injecting carbon deep underground, is a 'carbon negative' process that actively removes carbon from the atmosphere.
The IPCC report emphasizes the necessity of active carbon capture and removal to achieve global climate targets.
Trees, as natural carbon suckers, can only play a limited role due to space, water requirements, and the risk of deforestation.
Direct Air Capture machines are being developed as technological counterparts to trees, with significant potential for scaling.
Carbon Engineering aims to launch a commercial plant capable of removing one million tons of CO2 annually, a massive goal in the industry.
The cost of Direct Air Capture is currently over $200 per ton of CO2, necessitating better financial incentives for industry growth.
Government policies, such as carbon credits and taxes on emissions, are crucial for providing the necessary financial incentives.
Norway's success with a pollution tax demonstrates how incentives can drive companies towards carbon neutrality.
Sequestration's long-term safety and the vast underground space available make it a promising solution for carbon storage.
The collaboration between carbon capture companies and big oil companies for sequestration raises environmental concerns.
Enhanced oil recovery, a process where captured CO2 is used to extract more oil, is a financially viable but controversial application.
Public support and government incentives are essential to steer carbon capture technology away from fossil fuel interests.
Carbon capture is necessary but not sufficient; reducing emissions at the source remains a priority for combating climate change.
Transcripts
We know we’re currently pumping too much carbon dioxide into the air.
But wouldn’t it be amazing if we could find a way to suck it all up
and send it back deep underground?
Effectively it’s a solution that works.
I think, things are moving much more quickly than people expected.
Climate scientists are now saying that without such technology, we won’t hit our climate targets.
Can this actually work?!
And why is the money for this coming from the most unlikely source -
big oil companies?
So where did this crazy idea come from?
Turns out, this seemingly cutting edge idea to capture carbon is actually decades old!
The US Navy used capture as a way to clear the air inside submarines and space shuttles,
that filled up with CO2 from the breath of soldiers and astronauts.
"You may remember that scene from the movie Apollo 13,
where suddenly they had to build a CO2 scrubbing system."
"Those CO2 levels are gonna be getting toxic.
Well, I suggest you, gentlemen, invent a way to put a square peg in a round hole."
"And they dumped all this stuff out on the table and said, guys,
we have three hours to figure out how to make a CO2 scrubber. They had the technology
already on the spacecraft. We know how to do these things."
Modern carbon capture technology is basically this
CO2 scrubber on a bigger scale - like this plant in South India.
First, the polluted air is sucked into the industrial system through internal fans.
After being cleaned for impurities, it is transported towards the absorption plant. Where it is
cooled and then sent through a liquid solvent that absorbs CO2, which is then moved further into the
plant for processing, while the clean air, which is mostly only water vapour is now released.
The CO2 is later stripped out of the solvent and can be used to make other
products – like soda ash. Or it is used to heat greenhouses or even as a fuel.
You can capture CO2 right at the source of the pollution – like the Indian factory – where they
burn coal, and strip the CO2 out of the emitted smoke, and divert it to the adjoining soda ash factory.
This is called point source capture.
Hundreds of pilots and small-scale facilities,
and over 50 large-scale plants around
the world are currently doing this.
Then there is direct air capture, where big fans
suck large amounts of polluted air directly out of the atmosphere.
15 plants are currently doing this worldwide - but experts say the potential is huge.
Even if the CO2 is emitted again, like when the fuel is burned, it is considered 'carbon neutral',
as it hasn’t added to the CO2 that would have entered the air anyway.
The better thing to do for the environment, of course, is to prevent emissions from ever
entering the air – so companies are now working to inject carbon deep into the ground –
in a process called sequestration – that can preserve it there indefinitely.
This is considered "carbon negative", as it actively removes carbon from the atmosphere.
And this also has pretty ironic consequences. But more on that later.
"We know from the arithmetic of climate that we need all of these things and we need as
much of them all as we can get. In the next 30 years, we have to start removing about 10
billion tons of CO2 every year."
Julio Friedmann is one of the foremost experts on carbon capture,
who served in the US Department of Energy. He says massive CO2 removal needs to start now.
And the leading climate body, the IPCC agrees. In their latest report, they declare that the
world will not meet its climate target without active carbon capture and removal.
The original carbon suckers, aka trees,
can play a role. But considering the space and water needed – and the fact that they are always
at the risk of being cut down anyway – experts believe they can only play a fractional role.
So with the focus is now on the tech version of trees – Direct Air Capture
machines – that are springing up around the developed world.
Canadian Company Carbon Engineering plans to launch the biggest commercial capture plant in 2022.
"We're building a plant capable of removing
one million tons of carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere each year.
Currently direct air capture companies worldwide
capture 9000 tons of CO2 per year, so Carbon Engineering’s goals are massive.
Effectively, it's a solution that works with different technologies available,
but it's a question of can we scale the market right now? And I think that brings me back to what
Carbon Engineering's focus is at the moment, which is making it possible to have policy incentives."
And that’s the reason not everybody is already sucking carbon out of the air all over the world.
Estimates vary, but at the moment it costs over $200 to remove a ton of CO2 through Direct Air Capture.
To scale up the industry, companies say there need to be better financial incentives.
These can come either in the form of credits offered by the
government in exchange for removing the harmful substance from the air.
Or when captured CO2 can be traded at a good price on the market.
Plus: it could also come from taxing companies that allow their carbon dioxide fumes to escape.
And there is place where a combination of these measures has worked.
Norway introduced a tax on pollution almost 30 years ago,
which has now incentivized a number of large companies to capture their carbon,
setting them on a quick path towards carbon neutrality.
Sequestration has also been carried out and monitored in Iceland for over 20 years,
allowing experts to conclude that the process is safe for all practical purposes.
And the space available underground is virtually limitless.
Other companies in Europe, as well as Canada and the US are catching up.
But it’s early days.
And this brings us to the not so climate-friendly consequences of sequestration.
In the absence of large incentives from governments, all capture and sequestration
companies are collaborating with – paradoxically –
big oil companies.
"What do you need for sequestration, you need somewhere that you can store the carbon dioxide,
and one of the best places to store that, is old oil fields and where the owners of those assets
can be oil and gas companies. Well, that's a very strategic route for them to go down
to use their existing assets."
At the same time: putting the captured CO2 into the ground builds up pressure and makes
it easier for even more oil to be extracted – in a process called enhanced oil recovery.
Up to 88% of carbon captured and sequestered at the moment, is used to extract
more oil. And this makes investing in carbon capture financially viable for these oil companies.
"I certainly worry about the big oil role in carbon capture."
Dan Kammen is an expert on clean energy,
who has spoken out about the big problems with this kind of model.
Fossil fuel companies can continue to emit, and we just suck up some of their pollution and waste.
There are many other problems with the fossil fuel industry. In addition to greenhouse gases, there
is local air pollution, there's water pollution, there's environmental injustice. So finding a way
to extend the life of fossil fuel is essentially finding a way to continue poisoning the planet.
The science is clear in that we need
to actively remove carbon from the air.
But, without broad public support or
government incentives, these technologies remain
in the hands of private investors – who will only go where the profits are.
To keep the technology going, we need to ensure a clever combination of incentives
for non-oil companies, taxing polluters, and pricing CO2 higher.
"I am optimistic. I think that in 2030 we will see something in the order of 10
to 50 million tons a year of removal and the cost will be below a hundred dollars a ton.
I know that we can get there, and I hope we will."
So carbon capture does work, and we will need it to slow down the rate of climate change.
But it’s not the silver bullet. Our priority still needs to be polluting much less in the first place.
For more videos like this on the state of our planet, subscribe to our channel,
and tune in every Friday!
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)