After Gutenberg

Global Research Technologies announced success with a prototype of a Carbon Dioxide “Air-Capture” System. An innovative way to address carbon offsets

Klaus Lackner successfully demonstrated an “air extraction” prototype that removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at the Earth Institute, Columbia University.

Such “Lackner Towers” would:

• Capture CO2 from airstream via liquid sodium hydroxide

• Remove carbon from liquid sodium hydroxide via solid calcium hydroxide

• Release the concentrated CO2 from the calcium hydroxide by heating to 900 C

• Sequester the CO2

Seekerblog relays a further consideration of the possibility of air capture by Roger Pielke, Jr. “Air capture,” he explains, “refers to the direct removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.”

The University of Colorado policy researcher examines the pros / cons of direct air capture at hypothetical costs ranging from $100 to $500/ton carbon depending upon the processes proposed by Keith and separately by Lackner.

Motivated by recent discussions on this site about the Massachusetts vs. EPA lawsuit, I wondered what the costs would be of neutralizing the carbon dioxide emissions of U.S. autos via air capture, and indeed all of U.S. emissions. Here is what I have come up with.

Air capture is a compelling technology because it requires no government regulation, no change in behavior, no international negotiations, and, most importantly from the standpoint of political action, no changes in energy production or use. Politically, it is therefore as simple and straightforward an approach as can be imagined. It is a top down technology in the sense that it can be used to “tune” the atmosphere to a desired concentration level. The downside is that it is expensive, but still far cheaper than the damages projected, for instance, in the recent Stern Review. Its ease in implementation and political simplicity more than offset its higher costs than other approaches to reducing carbon emissions.

A demonstration of carbon capture from air at U. of Calgary. David Keith established leading work on this technology while at Carnegie Mellon. In 2004 Keith accepted a position at the University of Calgary. He and his recent Ph.D. student, Joshua Stolaroff, have continued the research.

In his recent dissertation, Dr. Stolaroff suggests (his lower realistic estimate) that air capture technologies can remove carbon dioxide at a cost of $140/ton of carbon dioxide (or about $500/ton of carbon). In an interview with PBS earlier this year, Prof. Lackner suggested that the costs of direct air capture might eventually be as low as $30/ton of carbon dioxide (or about $100/ton of carbon). In the thought experiment below I’ll use both $100/ton and $500/ton.

…This solution is so simple and straightforward, I wonder why those concerned with global warming aren’t trumpeting it as a solution in the United States? Instead, the focus is on complicated and politically intractable approaches with dubious chances for success. Air capture is easy (compared to other solutions that have been proposed) to implement and politically requires only enough motivation to win a $1.00/gallon gas tax. If global warming is indeed going to cost us 5-20% of global GDP, how can we not pursue air capture?

What have I missed? Excerpt from “The Simplest Solution to Eliminating U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions“

Reference:

“Climate strategy with CO2 capture from the air“