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…
🚨 The Royal Society has published a new briefing today finding that techniques to reflect a small portion of sunlight back into space (#SRM) could help lower global temperatures if deployed worldwide, but cannot replace emissions cuts or fully address climate impacts.
🧵1/7
2/ ➝ The report reviews solar radiation modification (#SRM) approaches, including stratospheric aerosol injection (#SAI) and marine cloud brightening (#MCB), outlining their potential to temporarily reduce warming and associated risks.
3/ ➝ It notes that SRM would only mask the effects of GHG emissions and would not address issues such as ocean acidification.
🚨🌲 New research reveals that even intact boreal forests, some of the planet’s strongest natural carbon sinks, lose their ability to absorb CO₂ as they age.
Here’s what the scientists found & why it matters for our climate models🧵1/9 #CarbonSink #CarbonRemoval
2/ Boreal forests cover vast regions across Canada, Russia, and Scandinavia and store enormous amounts of carbon in trees and soil.
They’re often seen as stable, long-term carbon sinks, but this study challenges that assumption with new global-scale data.
3/ Using seven global Net Ecosystem Productivity (NEP) datasets and a high-resolution forest age map, researchers tracked how C uptake changes as forests grow older.
They used a space-for-time substitution method, comparing forests of different ages to infer long-term trends.
🚨A major 6-country survey (N=5,310) finds Europeans support -ve emissions to meet climate goals, but strongly prefer nature-based solutions like afforestation over engineered options like Direct Air Capture. Trust hinges on benefits for nature & future generations.
🧵1/10 #CDR
2/ When allocating how to tackle emissions, respondents clearly prioritized immediate mitigation:
🚨A new study warns that efforts to cool the planet through stratospheric aerosol injection (#SAI) could face far greater challenges than models predict, from unpredictable monsoon shifts to material shortages & engineering limits, every step adds new risks.
🧵1/8 #SRM
2/ The authors explore both micro-level (engineering) and macro-level (governance & supply) factors that could restrict feasible deployment.
Key finding: these constraints could drastically raise costs, risks, and uncertainty, especially for “solid” (non-sulfate) aerosols.
3/ Traditional SAI uses sulfate aerosols (like volcanoes).
But alternatives, CaCO₃, TiO₂, Al₂O₃, ZrO₂, even diamond, promise less ozone damage.
Yet producing, aerosolizing, and dispersing these solids in submicron form is technically daunting.