It is well known how wide-scale an issue climate change is becoming, and our society is slowly realizing how catastrophic climate change might be for future generations. Despite how well known this issue has become, we are still failing to find solutions that best address the issue. Possible solutions such as a carbon tax and subsidization of renewable energy sources have been explored and even put into place all over the world. One solution that has not been fully considered/explored yet is the idea of actually removing the CO2 that is entering the atmosphere. The idea behind this is pretty self-explanatory. The CO2 is taken from the atmosphere and moved somewhere else. The solution seems easy in theory, but when applied to such a large scale such as the entire planet, lots of problems arise.
One of the more simple and easy to implement solutions is to create more forests. The process of photosynthesis already removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and trees are especially good at this process. When compared to some other solutions, using forests to remove carbon emissions can be “generally less than $50 per metric ton.” Not only is it far more cost-effective, but it also yields cleaner water and air in the process. One of the main issues with this though is that it takes up far too much valuable space such as farmland (WRI). Although, this farmland can still be put to use with soil that naturally stores carbon. Still, we do not have enough evidence to show the long-term effects of using soil carbon, and since it would extremely expensive and time-consuming to inhibit the 900 million acres of farmland in the U.S. with soil carbon, it would be risky to do so.
An interesting solution that would stop the problem at its source has been designed by some MIT engineers. This new design can “work on the gas at virtually any concentration level, even down to the roughly 400 parts per million currently found in the atmosphere.” This is rather important because older designs could only work at very high concentration levels and used almost anywhere. This new method is also “significantly less energy-intensive and expensive.” We have yet to see this new system in action, but these researchers have created a new company named Verdox and hope to have a pilot-scale plant within the next few years (MIT News).
The more difficult aspect of removing CO2 from the atmosphere seems to be where to store it. One of the most hopeful and well-established solutions is to store the excess carbon dioxide in the ground. Norway has already been practicing this by storing it in their oil fields. But this has proven to be controversial because storing CO2 in the ground can lead to earthquakes and even leakages back into the atmosphere. Iceland on the other hand has been exploring an option that involves CO2 being sequestered into porous basalt rock to be mineralized into stone (Eco Watch). These methods however are extremely costly, costing upwards of $650 per ton, which is more than 1000% more than what forests are already capable of.
As you can see, the act of removing and storing excess carbon dioxide is not simple and straightforward. Some methods that aren’t as costly as others such as forestation require a bountiful amount of land and do not seem feasible in the short term. Other methods that can be implemented rather quickly are extremely costly and might not be worth the cost. Still, it seems that politicians and authoritarian figures like to think in the short term, so it is hard for them to justify such a time-consuming and costly project. It is up to the younger generations to hold these politicians and authoritarian figures accountable for their actions. We have to understand that we cannot sit by and wait for them to do something, because they will usually do the wrong things. Luckily, with the recent inauguration of Joe Biden, we have seen him sign back into the Paris Climate Agreement, which agrees that the U.S. will reduce carbon emissions by 25% by 2025. Hopefully, we will start to see a change in the attitudes of our leaders.