Recent study present an analysis of “the gap between the CO2 storage required to meet net zero targets and the slow maturation of regional storage resources.”
Researchers estimate that “European storage rates need to boost 30-100x by 2030 to meet #NetZero by 2050. 🇨🇳 & North America face a similar challenge. The slow global progress of #CarbonStorage undermines the latest IPCC, IEA & EU transition pathways to net zero by 2050.”
2/12
Here, scientists of this study investigate “if sufficient #storage can be developed in time. China 🇨🇳 (30%), (15%) and Europe 🇪🇺(10%) dominate global #emissions.”
In this study, “Europe was chosen as a data-rich exemplar.”
4/12
“Assuming #NetZero in 2050, researchers back-calculate the #storage required under 3️⃣ scenarios of low, medium, and high #CCS demand.”
5/12
“Even the low demand scenario requires 0.2 Gt of #storage by 2030, increasing to 1.3 Gt by 2050. The moderate & high demand scenarios require 5-8 Gt by 2050. The current #CarbonStorage rate in #Europe is 0.001 Gt/yr.”
6/12
So, “there is a huge gap btw policy demand & #storage supply. Adaptation of existing #hydrocarbon tech has the potential to close this gap, with CCS for the entire EU requiring less than half the historic rate of HC exploration & development in UK North Sea from 1980-2010.”
7/12
“Counter to expectation, #storage cannot be delivered by exponential growth but requires an early & sustained investment of 30-50 boreholes per year starting before 2030 to build sufficient capacity,” researchers affirmed.
8/12
“A 5-year lead-time to identify & mature prospects needs policy intervention before 2025. Continued policy deferral will lock Europe into a low CCS pathway that restricts the contribution of #NETs at a potential cost of €100 billion for every gigatonne delayed beyond 2050.”
9/12
According to this research, “North America & China require similar policy intervention to close the gap on #CarbonStorage and #NetZero.”
10/12
To get more information on the research entitled: "Mind the gap: will slow progress on carbon dioxide storage undermine net zero by 2050?" (Preprint) visit ⬇️
📖📝➡️eartharxiv.org/repository/vie…
🚨Scientists Make Strides in Resurrecting Woolly Mammoths to Combat Climate Change🚨
A pioneering biotech firm has successfully genetically modified mice, marking a key step toward developing mammoth-like elephants to restore Arctic ecosystems & slow permafrost thaw.🧵1/10
2/ Colossal Biosciences (@colossal), a Texas-based biotech firm, has engineered mice with mammoth-like traits. Their ultimate goal? Create herds of cold-adapted elephants that could help protect permafrost and reduce carbon emissions.
3/Why does this matter for climate change?
Permafrost holds huge amounts of C. When it melts it emits CO2 & CH4—increasing global warming. Mammoths once maintained Arctic grasslands, which helped insulate the permafrost. Colossal wants to bring this process back via neo-mammoths
📰 Here's your round-up of top #CarbonDioxideRemoval News / Developments from this week (24 February - 02 March 2025):
🔗:
🧵0/23
The Frontier Buyers has teamed up with carbon removal developer Phlair, committing to invest $30.6 million in electrochemical direct air capture to remove 47,000 tons of CO2 from 2027 to 2030.
B.C. Centre for Innovation and Clean Energy launched Canada’s first CDR fund, offering $3M to support early-stage, hard-tech carbon removal solutions for decarbonizing B.C. and Canada.
"Geoengineering isn't just a climate issue—it's a geopolitical chess game. Only US & China have power to unilaterally deploy #SAI at scale."
Will they race to control skies or seek climate diplomacy? New study explores 4 futures🧵1/9
2/ SAI could cool the planet—but who controls it controls global climate security.
Key risks of unilateral deployment:
🔴 Termination shock
🔴 Environmental disruptions
🔴 SAI as a potential weapon
🔴 Geopolitical leverage—both a threat & opportunity
3/ This creates a security gap:
The US & China are locked in great power competition, yet neither has a clear strategy on SAI.
Who moves first? Who controls the stratosphere? The dilemma: Deploy & gain influence—or deter & risk falling behind?