Why It’s So Hard to Capture CO2 From the Air

Studies show carbon emissions are not slowing down fast enough to prevent 1.5 ℃ of warming. Could negative emission technologies be the solution?

Read More:

Negative emission technologies will not compensate for inadequate climate change mitigation efforts, say European science academies
“A new report confirms that negative emission technologies (NETs) offer only “limited realistic potential” to remove large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and not at the scale envisaged in some climate scenarios.”

Can We Really Scrub Carbon Dioxide From the Atmosphere?
“Removing carbon dioxide that is already in the air is seen as a potential way to combat global warming. There are various approaches, lumped together as ‘negative emissions technologies’ to distinguish them from technologies that reduce or eliminate emissions from power plants and other sources.”

Scientists Develop Lab-Made Mineral That Will Suck CO2 From The Atmosphere
“A dream solution is that humans could develop a way to suck as much CO2 from the atmosphere as we release, and combined with greenhouse gas emission reductions, we could slow or reverse the tide of climate change.”
____________________

Elements is more than just a science show. It’s your science-loving best friend, tasked with keeping you updated and interested on all the compelling, innovative and groundbreaking science happening all around us. Join our passionate hosts as they help break down and present fascinating science, from quarks to quantum theory and beyond.

Seeker explains every aspect of our world through a lens of science, inspiring a new generation of curious minds who want to know how today’s discoveries in science, math, engineering and technology are impacting our lives, and shaping our future. Our stories parse meaning from the noise in a world of rapidly changing information.

[Master_Therion]

In other words, carbon capture is great, but there's a _catch._

[ethanielclyne]

"Why don't we get bikini bottom, and push it somewhere else?!?!?!"

[azizuladnan]

0:18 that spongebob reference though 😂😂

[jugemujugemugokonosurikire]

Every 15 year old chemistry student:
JUST APPLY LIME WATER

[jlmahurin]

ya know not just trees that scrub CO2. The reforestation replaces that which we know works AND nature already has checks and balances for this. While we're at it I believe that same report mentioned reclaiming the desert growth by planting along desert edges and reversing that issue, which if done properly you could also turn those areas into farm land to feed the masses. Particularly in the Saharah ... I'm in favor of do no harm, versus opening a pandora box...

[Sylencer]

I like hemp.
It grows quickly, pulling CO2 out of the air faster than trees.
And then, when harvested, it can be turned into hempcrete, which is used as an insulation, thus making our homes require less energy as a whole.
It hits the problem from both sides.

[rea]

We are like that desperate chick in the movies: she knows her boyfriend is a jackass, but she will be sure that he will change if she just stays with him and keeps her hopes up, not really doing anything.
We keep hoping a magical invention will save our asses so we can keep living the way we do without having to move one finger. Cause that is true love, right?

[Michael-ftvg]

Or we could sell everybody o'hare air.

[Quebec]

Cutting wood and using it is good, old wood wont absorb CO2 as much and wood used in construction will keep the CO2 inside them. Hence cutting and planting saplings is the best as they capture more when they grow.

[benitollan]

2:33 planting new forests is standard and the total amount of trees is rising not declining.

[nolan]

As long as forests are replanted, the forestry industry is pretty much the best way we have for sequestering carbon out of the air.
When we transform our forestry products into building materials, the carbon in them can be kept out of the system for up to 100 or more years. This, combined with the fact that mature forests and agricultural lands hit a carbon equilibrium between growth and decay, it makes sense to harvest our forests and allow new growth to occur.

One thing I would actually like to hear about is the energy difference between getting CO2 out of the Air, and getting it out of seawater. Carbon levels in water naturally follow CO2 levels in the atmosphere, so sucking it out of the air or water can both be useful. The difference with using water though, is that we can get other valuable products, like clean water, out of the process at the same time.

[raparlaprashanthsai]

Can't they capture it as and when it is being emittied?

[xXxSkyViperxXx]

seeker's shirts are always so well made with the print. i wish they sold those kind of shirts where i live

[nedj]

"Planting new forests is hard" ...."Industrial hemp about that.."

[damirsarlah]

Why can not we make something that would capture co2 co and others when they are released like on exsaust or power plants?

[LakeAndBake]

They need to plant large areas quickly with drones, planting a fast growing wood that can be used for construction.

[hfoxhaxfox]

*Or you could stop being so choosy and breathe in CO2*
_Crisis Resolved_

[akaikiseki]

Like you said, planting plants/trees is the best solution...

[Jim_]

They should reuse hydroelectric plants to power stations like these, while moving the grid towards Nuclear energy. Also, to those in the comments section berating carbon capture technology, I would point out that no amount of trees is going to capture all the carbon we burned from deposits in which it was stored safely for millennia. One plant over a short period of time won’t fix the problem, but it’s a start.

[TheNick]

Multi level farms on barges placed outside harbors of major CO2 producing coastline cities? You could get cheaper fresh produce, while also cleaning the air. Could also make it so that you could plant trees where farms are currently