Short answer: Technically, yes, we can.
However, the long answer is a bit more complicated than that. Yes, we technically can capture Carbon Dioxide from the air, but should we? Allow me to explain:
Carbon capture technology has the potential to become one of the major players in achieving net-zero emissions, especially in sectors where current methods for cutting emissions are challenging or ineffective. However, results from the past few years have not been good for the future of carbon capture technology.
Direct Air Capture (DAC): Worth it or not?
Direct air capture (DAC) is an innovative technology designed to combat climate change by removing carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. These systems essentially work like massive air purifiers, taking in the air around them and using a variety of chemical or physical processes to capture CO2 molecules.
Picture of Orca, Iceland’s world’s first large-scale carbon dioxide removal plant.
The Orca, the world’s first large-scale carbon dioxide removal plant, offers a glimpse into the potential of DAC technology. This Icelandic facility captures carbon dioxide from the air and stores it deep underground, reducing greenhouse gases. It has a capture capacity of up to 4,000 tons of CO₂ per year, equivalent to the emissions of 870 cars at its full capacity.
Seems nice, right? So what’s the problem?
Direct Air Capture (DAC): The Illusion of False Hope
Good job! We have captured 4,000 tons of CO₂ from the atmosphere! Isn’t that a fantastic thing? Well, not exactly.
The thing about DACs is that Capturing CO₂ from the air is the most expensive application of carbon capture. The CO₂ is very diluted in our atmosphere, which means you must move a lot of air to get to one tonne of CO₂. This requires a massive amount of energy, often from fossil fuels, creating a significant carbon footprint. The reasons include:
- Energy Intensive: DAC systems are energy hogs. They require vast amounts of electricity to operate, often derived from fossil fuels, undermining their climate benefits.
- High Costs: DAC’s energy demands and complex engineering translate to high costs. These costs make it difficult to deploy widely and make DAC an economically unviable solution for most applications.
- Limited Scalability: Even with significant technological advancements, scaling up DAC to the level required to impact global emissions meaningfully remains a humongous challenge.
The Real Climate Solution
Instead of pouring resources into unproven and costly technologies like DAC, we should focus on proven, impactful solutions that directly address the root cause of climate change: fossil fuels. This can be done by:
- Phasing out fossil fuels: The most effective way to reduce CO2 emissions is to transition to renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and geothermal power.
- Improving energy efficiency: Implementing energy-saving measures in homes, buildings, and industries can significantly reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.
- Investing in sustainable transportation: Promoting public transit, cycling, and walking while transitioning to electric vehicles can drastically reduce emissions from the transportation sector.
Conclusion:
While DAC technology seems intriguing in theory, it presents various significant challenges and limitations. This is not to say that DAC technology has no role to play in the fight against climate change; it may have a niche application in specific sectors. However, it should not be viewed as the key to solving the climate crisis.
DAC is a costly and energy-intensive solution that may ultimately prove to be ineffective in addressing the climate crisis. Instead of chasing technological silver bullets, we must focus on proven and effective strategies for reducing emissions and transitioning to a sustainable future. While DAC alone can’t save the planet, its development—combined with other proven strategies—offers hope for a more sustainable future.
Disclaimer: This is a simplified overview. The actual science and engineering behind DAC are complex and multifaceted.