Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

CleanTechnica
Carbon capture and sequestration continues to get attention from fossil fuel companies and jurisdictions trying to maintain their profits and tax revenues. But it's worth looking at what it would cost. The scale of the problem is enormous and the cost of capturing CO2 from the air and storing it somewhere is very high -- about two times the global GDP.

Clean Power

Capturing Carbon Would Cost Twice The Global Annual GDP

Carbon capture and sequestration continues to get attention from fossil fuel companies and jurisdictions trying to maintain their profits and tax revenues. But it’s worth looking at what it would cost. The scale of the problem is enormous and the cost of capturing CO2 from the air and storing it somewhere is very high — about two times the global GDP.

Carbon capture and sequestration continues to get attention from fossil fuel companies and jurisdictions trying to maintain their profits and tax revenues. But it’s worth looking at what it would cost. The scale of the problem is enormous and the cost of capturing CO2 from the air and storing it somewhere is very high — about two times the global GDP.

main-qimg-dd63691d63b0fbb16a6cecbcd86e6e0fPrior to the industrial revolution there was about 250 ppm of CO2 in the air. Now we’re at about 400 ppm. Each part per million represents about 7.81 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide or about 2.13 gigatonnes of carbon by itself. That means about 1,172 gigatonnes of CO2 would have to be removed from the atmosphere to bring it back to pre-industrial levels and stop global warming.

A gigatonne is 1,000,000,000,000 kilograms. A trillion kilograms. 2.2 trillion pounds.

Each tonne of CO2 will cost $120-$140 USD to capture, ship and sequester. That means that capturing and sequestering the 1,172 gigatonnes would cost about $140 trillion to $164 trillion USD. The global GDP in 2015 was about $76 trillion dollars, so capturing all of the excess CO2 in the air would cost about two years of the total creation of wealth for the entire world, with nothing spent on anything else.

The largest form of human sequestration is in enhanced oil recovery fields, where CO2 is pumped in one end of mostly tapped out fields, the acidity liquifies the remaining sludge and the pressure pushes it to the other end where it is pumped out. CO2 in, more carbon-bearing fossil fuels out. Not really all that sensible when you look at it from that perspective.

In 2008, the entire enhanced oil recovery use of CO2 was 48 million tonnes or 0.048 gigatonnes. That’s about 0.004% of the necessary sequestration. Put another way, if CO2 were captured in the air and used for enhanced oil recovery at the same rate, it would take over 24,000 years to sequester the carbon emitted in the past couple of hundred years.

And that wouldn’t really help with all of the CO2 being put into the air from burning more fossil fuels. Currently, about 10 gigatonnes of CO2 are added to the atmosphere annually. That would require spending $1.2 to $1.4 trillion USD to capture and sequester just to stand still. That’s about twice the USA’s annual military budget, to put it in a little perspective. All for something with no inherent value.

And it won’t help with the non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions such as methane.

The answer isn’t carbon capture and sequestration. That’s a small wedge. Useful to spend a bit on, but not an answer. The answer is to decarbonize electrical generation, then electrify everything. That will eliminate most CO2e emissions in the first place.

 
I don't like paywalls. You don't like paywalls. Who likes paywalls? Here at CleanTechnica, we implemented a limited paywall for a while, but it always felt wrong — and it was always tough to decide what we should put behind there. In theory, your most exclusive and best content goes behind a paywall. But then fewer people read it! We just don't like paywalls, and so we've decided to ditch ours. Unfortunately, the media business is still a tough, cut-throat business with tiny margins. It's a never-ending Olympic challenge to stay above water or even perhaps — gasp — grow. So ...
If you like what we do and want to support us, please chip in a bit monthly via PayPal or Patreon to help our team do what we do! Thank you!
Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!
 

Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.
 

Written By

is a member of the Advisory Boards of electric aviation startup FLIMAX, Chief Strategist at TFIE Strategy and co-founder of distnc technologies. He spends his time projecting scenarios for decarbonization 40-80 years into the future, and assisting executives, Boards and investors to pick wisely today. Whether it's refueling aviation, grid storage, vehicle-to-grid, or hydrogen demand, his work is based on fundamentals of physics, economics and human nature, and informed by the decarbonization requirements and innovations of multiple domains. His leadership positions in North America, Asia and Latin America enhanced his global point of view. He publishes regularly in multiple outlets on innovation, business, technology and policy. He is available for Board, strategy advisor and speaking engagements.

Comments

You May Also Like

Clean Power

With more scrapping and more direct reduction using lower carbon technologies such as Midrex' DRI and HYBRIT every decade, and the likely creation of those...

Clean Transport

A new type of autonomous electric train is on track to electrify the US freight rail network and push diesel trucks off the highways,...

Clean Power

Already 2.4 times as expensive as very, very expensive Hinkley. First of a kind, so very likely to double or more in price. Very...

Clean Power

Steel, like concrete, is such an integral part of our world that we rarely notice it. From wherever you are reading this, I guarantee...

Copyright © 2023 CleanTechnica. The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by and do not necessarily represent the views of CleanTechnica, its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.

Advertisement