CO2 Value Europe’s Post

🍀 Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Did you know, that in 2022, the United States government established a 2050 goal to reach net-zero emissions by decarbonizing the U.S. economy, removing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it at the gigaton scale (at least a billion tons per year). 👇Roads to Removal - a new report by a conglomerate of esteemed U.S. research institutions - lays out a road map to this goal and answers the question: How much CO2 is it possible to remove in the United States and at what cost? The report concludes that with today’s technologies, removing 1 billion metric tons of CO2 per year will annually cost roughly $130 billion in 2050, or about 0.5% of current U.S. GDP. This will require increasing the uptake of carbon in forests and in working agricultural lands, converting waste biomass into fuels and CO2 and using purpose-built machines to remove CO2 directly from the air. This ensemble of lowest-cost approaches for CO2 removal would create more than 440,000 long-term jobs in the U.S. and can be achieved using renewable energy sources, with currently available land and below ground geologic storage. The report shows that to achieve the billion-ton scale of carbon dioxide removal needed by 2050 to achieve net-zero goals, the United States must use all removal methods available – oceans, forests, cropland soils, biomass and minerals and chemicals through direct air capture. It is a clear conclusion that direct air capture technologies with geologic storage will eventually be necessary to achieve the net-zero goal and it is a clear conclusion that direct air capture will require additional investments in research and development of DAC technologies. At Innovation Centre Denmark Silicon Valley we have been working systematically for several years building bridges between Denmark 🇩🇰 and the United States 🇺🇸 on the roads to zero. We need to do our best and remove the rest; or suck it up, to put it simple. If you want to engage on this important agenda, feel free to reach out. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) | Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory | Berkeley Lab | ClimateWorks Foundation | Innovation Centre Denmark | Uddannelses- og Forskningsstyrelsen | Novo Nordisk Foundation CO₂ Research Center (CORC) | INNO-CCUS | State of Green Denmark | Green Hub Denmark | Klimarådet | Josefine Lange Strandgaard

𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐕𝐒 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 Carbon capture is the trapping of carbon emissions just after they’ve been emitted but before they can enter our atmosphere. Carbon sequestration is the storage of removed or captured carbon in various environmental reservoirs.  Carbon capture and carbon sequestration are two sustainability tools that can help individuals and organizations lower their carbon footprints. Understanding how they work and why they are different is important in the fight against global climate change. Carbon capture refers to the process of capturing carbon after it is emitted, but before it can enter our atmosphere. There are three types, Pre-combustion, Post-combustion and Oxyfuel. Carbon sequestration, the long-term storage of carbon, is another option to reduce carbon emissions. This can occur either artificially or biologically via various methods. Artificial carbon sequestration is a result of carbon capture, where the captured carbon is compressed into a liquid and transported via pipeline, ship, or tanker before being pumped deep underground. The main difference between carbon capture and carbon sequestration is that carbon capture encompasses carbon sequestration, but carbon sequestration is just one part of carbon capture. Carbon capture can also include the formulation of new products from the gathered carbon. #hydrogen #hidrogeno #greenhydrogen #energy #energia #energie #energytransition #transicionenergetica #energialimpia #hidrogenoverde #cleanenergy #industria #UNIDO #decarbonization #emissionsreduction #descarbonizacion #valuechain #hydrogenstrategy #suezcanal #sczone #electrolysis #electrolyzer #greenhydrogen #electrolyser #pem #soec #ev #electrification #electricvehicles #fcev #bev #soe #aem #cathode #anode #h2 #oxygen #greenelectricity #water #energy #mena #renewableenergy #renewablehydrogen #greenhydrogen #idrogenoverde #hydrogènevert #hydrogenenergy #hydrogenstrategy #hidrogenioverde #hidrogenoverde #hidrógeno #hidrogenio #wasserstoff #wasserstoff #onshorewind #solarenergy #hydroenergy #ifc #afc #H2Med #irena #h2lligence #renewableenergy #canaldesuez #sokhna #emethanol #hydrogènevert #hydrogène #windenergie #hydrogenenergy #hydrogenfuel #energymix #hidrogenoverde #hidrógeno #hidrogenioverde #irena #idrogenoverde #idrogeno #hidrojen #windpower #windenergy #menaregion #doosan #hydrogenfuelcell #giz #hydrogeneurope #northafrica #ifc #iea #ebrd #eib #europe #cop28 #cop28uae #waterstof #greenfuel #greenammonia #ebrd #greenmethanol #irena #saf #desalination #afriquedelouest #directelectrolysis #seawaterelectrolysis #greenfertilizers #greenfertilisers #greenfuel #greenmethanol #egypt #cairo #blueeconomy #world_bank #un #worldbankgroup #greensteel #greenfert #canaldesuez #suezcanal #redsea #mediterraneansea #greenbunkering #bunkering #geothermal #geothermalenergy #climatechange #climate #esg #afrique #afriquedusud #ccus #ccs #carboncapture Osama Fawzy Georgy HENEIN, MBA

Recycling Carbon Dioxide into Methane: Copper Catalysts and Climate Change Mitigation Researchers at McGill University in Canada have developed an innovative technique to convert atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into methane, as detailed in a study published in the journal *Environment and Energy* on July 4th. CO2 is a major contributor to climate change. Its high concentration in the atmosphere enhances the greenhouse effect, trapping infrared radiation from the Earth and raising global temperatures. Reducing CO2 emissions is a critical research priority in the fight against global warming. Methane (CH4) is the simplest hydrocarbon and a cleaner alternative to other fossil fuels like coal and oil due to its lower carbon content, which results in less CO2 when burned. Methane's primary use is in generating electricity and heat, and it is the main component of natural gas, which benefits from an established infrastructure for storage, distribution, and use. By converting atmospheric CO2 into methane, it is possible to create a sustainable loop where the CO2 emitted from burning methane is recycled back into methane, potentially achieving a carbon-neutral cycle. The McGill researchers utilized renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, to drive the electrochemical conversion of CO2 to methane. This process, known as "electrocatalysis," accelerates chemical reactions using electricity through specially designed catalysts, without increasing atmospheric CO2 levels. The team used copper as the catalyst, experimenting with varying particle sizes from clusters of 19 atoms to larger ones containing a thousand atoms. They discovered that smaller copper nanoclusters were particularly effective in producing methane, indicating that the size and structure of these clusters play a crucial role in the reaction's outcome. The researchers aim to enhance the reaction's efficiency and explore its industrial applications. They are optimistic that their findings could pave the way for new methods of producing clean, sustainable energy. By continuing to refine this technology, they hope to contribute significantly to the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, helping to mitigate climate change and create a sustainable energy future. https://lnkd.in/dr5vQefQ

This week's historic #cop28 agreement signals beginning of the end for fossil fuel usage. As approximately 9 billion tonnes of CO2 emitted today are unrelated to power plants, Carbon Capture remains crucial for immediate CO2 abatement and industrial decarbonisation. Industries like cement, steel and glass are expected to grow by more than 30% by 2050. The CO2 created in the formation these products will continue to be emitted after a complete transition to renewable energy, making carbon capture vital for addressing the non-energy related emissions of critical industries in the long term. Read more about the unrivalled advantages of #DAC in our latest blog. #directaircapture #carboncapture #fossilfuels #carbondioxide #carbonemissions #climateaction

New findings from the University of Oxford show that carbon capture efforts need to quadruple by 2050 to meet our climate targets. Currently, reforestation efforts remove 2 billion tons of CO2 annually, but by mid-century, we need to capture 7 to 9 billion tons annually to avoid catastrophic climate change. Nature-based solutions like afforestation are essential, but pose challenges, including competition for land needed for food and biofuel production. Technological advances, such as direct air capture with carbon storage (DACCS) and capture after biomass combustion (BECCS), offer promise but come with potential environmental risks. While necessary to meet climate goals, the research cautions against relying solely on carbon capture technologies, emphasizing that aggressive emissions reductions remain the “most important mitigation strategy.” Read more about this critical issue: https://lnkd.in/g9qSG4Qf #thomaslloyd #renewableenergy #infrastructure #esg #netzero #asia #climatechange #sustainability #emergingmarkets #energytransition #electricity #biomass

How can negative emissions help to meet climate targets? On 6 Feb, the European Commission will publish its views on a 2040 climate target (possibly 90% reduction). Negative emissions can play an important role in achieving such target, and biomethane can generate negative emissions in 3 ways: pre-combustion CCS, post-combustion CCS and soil organic carbon accumulation. When producing a cubic metre of biomethane, 1.3kg of relatively pure CO2 is captured from biogas. This CO2 can be stored below-ground. One relatively large production installation that produces 10 mln m3 biomethane annually can thus generate 13,000 tonne of negative CO2 emissions. The full 35 bcm annual EU production by 2030 can generate 45 Mtonne of negative emissions, or 40% of total GHG emissions of the country of Belgium. This will require a timely development of CO2 transport and storage infrastructures. On top of this, it is possible to capture and store CO2 when combusting biomethane in large-scale industrial installations or power plants. The capture rate depends on the application, can be 55-70% in primary steel production and 90% when producing electricity. If the output of a 10 mln m3/yr biomethane plant is used to produce power, some 16,000 tonnes of negative emissions can be generated. The beauty is that this post-combustion CCS can be applied while also doing pre-combustion CCS. Then there's the option of soil organic carbon accumulation: storing biogenic carbon below agricultural soils. When producing biomethane from agricultural biomass (sequential crops can be sustainably cultivated on degraded land), below ground biomass such as root systems will increase soil carbon levels. This can lead to negative emissions if farmers continuously apply no or low tillage, thereby preventing soil carbon from being emitted back into the atmosphere. This could generate another 0.3kg of negative emissions per cubic metre of biomethane. And of course, instead of storing captured biogenic CO2 below-ground, it can also be used for synfuel production to mitigate fossil fuel emissions. This doesn't lead to negative emissions but still offers an important extra contribution to emission reduction. Common Futures. Energy Transition Specialists analyses the energy system role of biomethane. Please reach out if you wish to learn more about our work.

Insightful findings! They illuminate a promising solution for tackling carbon emissions in cement-making, a key contributor to global warming. Commendably, the research team pioneers an innovative approach—transforming captured CO2 into green hydrogen and carbon nanofibers for cement production. Their focus on creating carbon-sequestering products, like nanofiber-enhanced cement, provides a practical avenue for mitigating environmental impact. The diverse strategies mentioned, from carbon capture in biofuel facilities to carbon-sucking cement technologies, underscore the urgency of sustainable alternatives. Notably, the emphasis on reducing emissions from cement-making aligns with the broader goal of combating climate change, given its substantial contribution to industrial emissions. Addressing concerns about innovation costs, the article delves into a two-part process involving electrolysis and a heat-driven reaction. The dual benefit of producing green hydrogen adds economic viability to the initiative. Attention to detail, like the use of an iron-cobalt alloy catalyst and its recyclability, showcases a thoughtful approach to sustainability and potential scalability. The conclusion, highlighting carbon-negative potential when powered by renewable energy, adds a crucial dimension to the overall impact. This article not only informs about the current state of carbon capture technology but also instills optimism for a more sustainable future in cement production.

Have you ever heard of carbon capture❔ Some industries that struggle to completely eliminate their carbon footprint have been promoting this specific technology as a silver bullet for years. But critics argue this is just a way to avoid taking other, more effective actions to cut emissions. The EU is now increasingly turning its attention to carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) to achieve its climate goals. On 6 February, the European Commission presented an Industrial Carbon Management Strategy, which outlines upcoming EU actions relating to CC(U)S. A perfect moment to take a look at carbon capture in a European context: ✅ What is the current legislative landscape? ✅ What is in the new strategy? ✅ And what does it mean for businesses? Your answers 👉 https://lnkd.in/d2TnaYeY #CarbonCapture #CCUS #EU

Carbon capture technologies are a distraction from implementing effective carbon solutions, proposed by oil companies to delay the phase-out of fossil fuels. So states this opinion article from Scientific American: "Don’t Fall for Big Oil’s Carbon Capture Deceptions". Indeed, the technology comes with many drawbacks. After decades of research, the technology has not proven to be efficient, only absorbing an insignificant fraction of CO2 from the air. It is prohibitively expensive, costing around $1000 per ton of CO2 removed when other options such as increasing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and addressing agricultural and industrial emissions either cost less than $10/ton or have negative costs, saving money instead. Paradoxically, these technologies also require excessive amounts of energy. So much so that powering them with fossil fuels would lose the environmental benefit but renewable energy would be much more efficiently used to directly displace fossil fuels. Lastly, the CO2 captured is often used to extract even more oil and gas, further solidifying the reliance on fossil fuels while maintaining health hazards in polluted communities high, and preserving the inequalities and difficulties faced by frontline and energy communities. We need serious climate solutions committed to helping disadvantaged communities and phasing out fossil fuels. Follow us for more energy equity news, and check out the article for much more information on the topic! https://buff.ly/4a5Gmuz #renewableenergy #solarenergy #climatechange #technology #innovation #socialimpact #equity #equityandinclusion #climatechange #environment #sustainability

Carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) has an essential role to play in the energy transition. Some sectors--like cement, air travel, and maritime shipping--are extremely hard to decarbonize. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects fossil fuel use to grow by 17% by 2050 as countries like China and India work to raise living standards for hundreds of millions of people. China accounts for about half of the world's coal consumption and is building new coal plants. It will be virtually impossible to get to net zero by 2050 without carbon capture technologies. The International Energy Agency notes that "CCUS is an important technological option for reducing CO2 emissions in the energy sector and will be essential to achieving the goal of net-zero emissions." Thus it is sad and ironic that CCUS has so many critics who are loud supporters for net zero. While there are admittedly real challenges to the economics and scaling of CCUS, many of its critics are voicing the specious argument that CCUS simply prolongs the production of fossil fuels. The reality of the need for CCUS is bumping up against the ideology of those who opposite it. The goal of getting to net zero shouldn't be confused with the illusion that putting the fossil fuel energy out of business is how we will get there. Philip Rossetti of the R Street Institute and I address this important issue in a piece for RealClearEnergy. Our thanks to Jude Clemente for publishing it. https://lnkd.in/erAvd54F