User:Carvacha/sandbox

Scale of CCS to Achieve Climate Change Mitigation

Introduction to CCS What is it? Why is it important? What are wedges? Why is it a wedge?

CCS vs CCUS?? Role of US NDC Paris Agreement brief intro and link to the article Significance of population CCS and net zero emissions What scale globally? What scale US? Different climate models?

Large scale CCS play a crucial role to reach zero emissions. However, CCS’ primarily role is to delay the shift from fossil fuels and thereby reducing transition costs. Without the use of CCUS this shift would cost 138% more. (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: Climate Change, Economic Competitiveness, and Energy Security, “CCUS for climate change”), (Nature,”Critical uncertainties under a net-zero emission transition”)

It may require a negative emission strategy which would include BECCS and this may create an issue about water and food security. (Nature,”Critical uncertainties under a net-zero emission transition”)

If burning of fossil fuels were used with CCS. Part of this energy could be used to perform electrolysis on water and by this CCS could have great use in the making of carbon neutral vehicles. (Role of CCUS in a below 2 degrees scenario, “.Achieving a cost effective climate pathway to 2050”)

CCS and 2.0 What scale globally? What scale US? Different climate models?

The concept of a 2.0 degree came to light in the European union of 1996 where the goal was to reduced the global temperature range relative pre-industrial levels. The decision of the 2 Celcius range was decided mostly on the evidence that many ecosystems are at risk with a 2 degree change. In order to limit the anthropogenic emissions such that there is 2 celsius degree change relative to the periods between 1861-1880 would need to be limited for about 1000 PgC since that period. However, by the end of 2011 about of half of the budget was already released (445 PgC) indicating that a lower budget is necessary. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter12_FINAL.pdf A distinctive path that aims for a 2 C limit might have complications. The first complication involves the lack of feedbacks in IPCC climate models. Those feedbacks include reduction of ice sheet size with a potential release of greenhouse gases by thawing tundra. Since the lifetime of CO2 in the climate atmosphere is so long,those feedbacks have to be taken into consideration. Another important factor to consider is that for a 2 C scenario implies an expansion of fossil fuels into other sources that are harder to obtain. Examples of this resources can be exploitation of tar sands, tar shales, hydrofracking for oil and gas, coal mining , drilling in the Arctic Amazon, and deep ocean. Therefore, 2 C scenarios result in more CO2 produce per unit of useable energy, also the danger of extra released CH4 via mining process has to be taken into account. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081648#s1

Different models are based on when the peak of carbon emissions happen on a global scale. In one article regarding a The 2C scenario with respect to pre-industrial levels can be approached by emissions in short term and long term resolutions as well as the cost effectiveness of different solutions to reduce carbon emissions. Short term goals are set to quantify progress towards the temperature goal. In a short term goal, year 2020, the allowable carbon emissions must be between 41 and 55 GtCO2e per year. The short term 2 C scenario is nonexistent without CCS. https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1758 CCUS would have to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 7 Gt each year by 2050 which requires power generation with CCS of 950 GW in order to reach a 2.0 degree goal.The cost of capturing CO2 is estimated to be $500/tC. If the goal with the 2 Celsius is to store a total 7 Gt per year, then the collective amount needed to achieve this is around 3.5 trillion dollars per year.As expected the economic demand needed to achieve this goal is high. This amount of money is equivalent to gross national incomes for countries such as Russia or United Kingdom, and it represents 18% of United States 2017 gross national income (19.61 trillion dollars) (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: Climate Change, Economic Competitiveness, and Energy Security, “CCUS for climate change”)

CCS and below 2°C What scale globally? What scale US? Different climate models?

A change on temperature below 2°C is very ambitious and to certain extent, almost impossible to achieve. A change below 1°C with respect to pre industrial era is now unconceivable because by 2017 there was an increase of 1°C (RR1). A one degree change with respect to pre industrial times bring serious consequences in the environment and society, for this adaptation has to occurred. Countries adapted to 1°C changes by building flood defense in the shores, sea walls or restoring mangroves. Also there is efforts to guide development away from high risk areas, and also educate the community by social interactions to create social awareness in the situation (RR2). Adaptation also involves building building capacity to respond better to climate change impacts, which includes increasing the flexibility of governance more flexible that provides different insurance for increasing natural disasters. Because of the immediate ability to control the temperature at the 1°C, the next realistic target is 1.5°C. There is enough confidence that past emissions alone (pre-industrial time) will not be enough to go beyond the 1.5°C target. In other words, if all anthropogenic emissions were stopped today (reduced to zero), any increase beyond the 1°C change for more than half of a degree before 2100 is unlikely(RR3). If anthropogenic emission are considered, the probability for the planet increasing for more than 1.5°C before 2100 are very high.In other words, scenarios were the degree change is maintain below 1.5°C are very challenging to achieve but not impossible. Emissions have to peak by 2020 and decline after that. Also, it will be necessary to reduce net CO2 emissions to zero and negative emissions have to be a reality by the second half of the 21st century. Models RCP1.9/1.5C scenarios show a carbon budget from 2018 to 2100 where carbon emission have to be between 175 and 400 GtCO2 (RR1) http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/sr15/sr15_chapter1.pdf (RR2)http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/sr15/sr15_chapter4.pdf (RR3)http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/sr15/sr15_chapter1.pdf (RR4)https://www.carbonbrief.org/new-scenarios-world-limit-warming-one-point-five-celsius-2100