A comparative analysis of the efficiency, timing, and permanence of CO 2 removal pathways
A comparative analysis of the efficiency, timing, and permanence of CO 2 removal pathways
复制标题
CO 2 去除途径的效率、时间和持久性的比较分析
DOI：
10.1039/d2ee01021f
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
32.5
通讯作者：
Chiquier S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chiquier S
消除二氧化碳(CDR)对于实现《巴黎协定》的气候目标至关重要。虽然已经确定了几种CDR途径，但它们在二氧化碳去除效率、从部署到有效去除二氧化碳之间所经过的时间以及二氧化碳去除的持久性方面存在显著差异。所有这些标准对于CDR的商业规模部署至关重要。在这项研究中，我们通过这个镜头评估了一系列典型的CDR途径，包括植树造林/再造林(AR)、碳捕获和封存的生物能源(BECCS)、生物炭、直接空气捕获和封存二氧化碳(DACCS)和增强风化(EW)。我们提出了一系列的思维实验，考虑了AR的不同气候和森林类型、土地类型(例如影响生物量产量和(直接和间接)土地利用变化)、BECCS和生物炭的生物量类型、DAC的捕获过程以及EW的岩石类型。结果表明，AR可以高效地传递CDR，在最佳条件下可达到95%-99%。然而，地区性生物地球物理因素，例如近期寒冷气候下森林生长相对缓慢和有限，或长期暴露在自然干扰下，例如温暖和干燥气候下的野火，大大降低了AR的整体二氧化碳去除效率。相反，BECCS提供即时和永久的CDR，但其二氧化碳去除效率可能会受到与(直接和间接)土地利用变化相关的任何初始碳债务的显著影响，从而显著延迟。生物炭的CDR效率很低，当它第一次与土壤结合时，它的CDR效率在20%-39%之间，而且与所考虑的生物质原料无关。此外，由于生物炭的腐烂，随着时间的推移，其脱碳效率可降低到−3%~5%。最后，对于BECCS，DAC和EW提供永久的二氧化碳去除，但它们的二氧化碳去除效率主要取决于它们所部署的能源系统，如果当前部署，它们的−分别在5%到90%和1792%之间。然而，由于电子水的碳化速率，随着时间的推移，电子水的CDR效率可提高到51-92%。
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is essential to deliver the climate objectives of the Paris Agreement. Whilst several CDR pathways have been identified, they vary significantly in terms of CO2 removal efficiency, elapsed time between their deployment and effective CO2 removal, and CO2 removal permanence. All these criteria are critical for the commercial-scale deployment of CDR. In this study, we evaluate a set of archetypal CDR pathways—including afforestation/reforestation (AR), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), biochar, direct air capture of CO2 with storage (DACCS) and enhanced weathering (EW)—through this lens. We present a series of thought experiments, considering different climates and forest types for AR, land types, e.g. impacting biomass yield and (direct and indirect) land use change, and biomass types for BECCS and biochar, capture processes for DACCS, and rock types for EW. Results show that AR can be highly efficient in delivering CDR, up to 95–99% under optimal conditions. However, regional bio-geophysical factors, such as the near-term relatively slow and limited forest growth in cold climates, or the long-term exposure to natural disturbances, e.g. wildfires in warm and dry climates, substantially reduces the overall CO2 removal efficiency of AR. Conversely, BECCS delivers immediate and permanent CDR, but its CO2 removal efficiency can be significantly impacted by any initial carbon debt associated with (direct and indirect) land use change, and thereby significantly delayed. Biochar achieves low CDR efficiency, in the range of 20–39% when it is first integrated with the soil, and that regardless of the biomass feedstock considered. Moreover, its CO2 removal efficiency can decrease to −3 to 5% with time, owing to the decay of biochar. Finally, as for BECCS, DACCS and EW deliver permanent CO2 removal, but their CO2 removal efficiencies are substantially characterized by the energy system within which they are deployed, in the range of −5 to 90% and 17–92%, respectively, if currently deployed. However, the CDR efficiency of EW can increase to 51–92% with time, owing to the carbonation rate of EW.