Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have increased due to a change to an industrial modern society powered mainly by fossil fuels. To remove these greenhouse gases from the atmosphere we might also need industrial processes that remove CO2 from the atmosphere on a similar scale as is being put in the atmosphere by power stations and internal combustion engines.
The word ‘sink’ might also confuse the matter in relation to carbon cycles on the planet. It may give a superficial impression that an answer would be capturing and burying CO2 in geosequestration projects. In a carbon dioxide ‘sink’ in the carbon cycle the carbon dioxide is CHANGED into something else. These terms apply to macro level phenomena over a large scale. A ‘source’ in the carbon cycle is also something that initially is some other kind of chemical compound, such as oil or gas or plant material or detritus etcetera, and that then goes through a chemical process (combustion or respiration) that has carbon dioxide as a by product. A carbon dioxide ‘sink’ is a process that takes carbon dioxide, as well as other things such as water and energy, and turns the chemical components of carbon dioxide into something else.
A tree can act as a net absorber of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through the process of photosynthesis. This uses solar energy as well as water, but the store of carbon from that process is also vulnerable to being released back into the atmosphere through a bush fire or after being processed into other products. All this should be basic common sense.
There needs to be industrial scale processes that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and that change it into something else that is easy to deal with and that will not easily be reverted back into a greenhouse gas. Perhaps the simplest industrial carbon dioxide sink would be an industrial process that separates the carbon from the oxygen and that is powered with renewable energy. Perhaps the carbon dioxide might best be sourced from a multitude of small scale collection points and then transported to an industrial plant where the CO2 can be split apart. The carbon can then be safely disposed as a solid and the oxygen released back to the atmosphere.
Obviously these industrial scale processes need to be powered by alternative energy sources such as wind and solar. Nuclear power is not an answer, as stated on previous posts and by many other people. I don’t think that hydrogen is a long term answer because most hydrogen created today in industry is done so with fossil fuels as an input and carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide as by products. Hydrogen can also be produced from water, but this is expensive in terms of energy and water is becoming a valuable and scarce resource itself.
Taking CO2 out of the atmosphere at industrial level scales is another aspect of dealing with global warming, as well as many other aspects including energy efficiency and changing electrical energy systems primarily from continuous distribution systems via a grid into discrete energy storage systems with suitable energy capacities for the work required and topped up quickly as required, installing more alternative energy sources such as PV or thermal solar and wind turbines, and much else besides.
Actively putting energy and resources into removing CO2 directly from the atmosphere may well level out and then reduce the concentrations of atmospheric CO2 much quickly than current modelling may suggest. It may also provide a mechanism that will help the countries that have the ability to reduce CO2 levels to actively work towards this end even while developing nations lag behind with their efforts. There will be a cost for this kind of work and global carbon trading systems can go some way towards paying for these plants. Accountable participation in carbon trading systems may in time become major bargaining chips for international trade and part of an accreditation for export into multinational market blocs. Recalcitrant ‘developing’ nations would most likely be persuaded to join major global carbon trading schemes in time. The case for the need of these systems to deal with atmospheric CO2 levels can be easily made. Those nations that actually roll up their sleeves and get to productive work on these issues may well find themselves in leadership positions through this 21st century, if nations wear sleeves that is.
{ 1 } Comments
Fusion power is going to be the way to get some sort of massive industrial sink aloft it should happen by 2050 as it is a working technology now. I say alof because we are running into the real issue that co2 is not coming down from the atmosphere and this increases as the planet gets warmer (that whole hot air rising on a macro level). An Industrial Sink would actually have to fly in order to make a difference. Perhaps some sort of low orbit might suffice as long as the device could avoid being sucked into the gravity of the planet but my bet is still going to be on some type of fusion powered prop vehicle (a blimp maybe) with the surface area of the aero vehicle covered in some type of advanced carbondioxide sink that could regularly attempt to cut down on the higher atmosphere co2 that is causing the feedback loop that is so dangerous to us.
{ 1 } Trackback
[...] 31/10/2007 Industrial scale CO2 sinks [Web] [...]