Introduction
Using scientific methods and technology to pull out Carbon Dioxide from our polluted skies had been an ambitious solution to reduce the impact of global warming. But it had been dismissed as an impractical method to fight climate change by western world because of the prohibitive cost involved to make it a reality, though not impossible. However, as the global warming deteriorated and climate change concerns have been intensified, due to the unabashed emittance of “greenhouse gases” by all world countries, the idea is gaining support, especially from the large Corporate houses facing pressure to act on climate. Ironically, the Countries who spearhead the climate change movement are actually polluting the air space more than anyone else. When Trump walked out from the Climate Treaty, though US is the biggest culprit in this count, the world looked on helplessly. Now that President Biden has pledged all out support to the cause, the world is optimistic again to initiate some effective remedial action to save the world from turning into a gas chamber.
What is Direct Air Capture?
Direct Air Capture is the process of chemically scrubbing carbon dioxide directly from the ambient air, and then storing it either underground or in long-lived products. This new technology is similar to the carbon capture and storage technology used to capture emissions from sources like power plants and industrial facilities. The difference is that direct air capture removes excess carbon directly from the atmosphere, instead of capturing it at the source. It is relatively straightforward to measure and account for the climate benefits of direct air capture, and its potential scale of deployment is enormous.
But the technology remains costly and energy-intensive. It is often difficult to pin down costs for new direct air capture technologies, but a 2018 study estimates that it would cost about $94-$232 per metric ton. Earlier estimates were higher. Direct air capture also requires substantial heat and power inputs: scrubbing 1 giga-ton of carbon dioxide from the air could require nearly 10 percent of today’s total energy consumption. The direct air capture technology would also need to be powered by low- or zero-carbon energy sources to result in net carbon removal. Investing in technological development and deployment experience, together with continued progress in the deployment of cheap, clean energy, could advance prospects for direct air capture at a large scale.
Multiple companies have already developed direct air capture systems, despite the near absence of public research and development spending on the technology for many years. In late 2019, however, Congress appropriated $60 million for carbon removal technologies, including at least $35 million for direct air capture, an important step toward the level of investment needed to scale up development efforts.
The welcoming trend is, a growing number of companies are pouring money into – Engineered Carbon Removal- for example using giant fans to pull carbon dioxide from the air and trap it.
Occidental Petroleum and United Airlines are investing in a large ” direct air capture” plant in Texas that will use gigantic fans and chemical agents to scrub Carbon Dioxide from the sky and inject it deep underground. Stripe and Shopify, two e- commerce companies have each begun spending $ 1 million each per year, on start-ups working on carbon removal techniques, such as sequestering the gas in concrete for construction. Microsoft is planning to invest huge money for removing one million tonnes of Carbon Dioxide. The UN backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has announced – Countries may need to remove between 100 billion and 1 trillion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in this century to avert the worst effects of Climate Change. We can’t achieve this target by just planting more trees. However, the challenge is how to reduce the cost factor to accomplish the carbon removal by technology. Right now sucking off, one tonne of carbon from the sky costs $ 600 or more, which is prohibitive. However, the scientist world believe that the cost can be pegged to $ 100, soon by using alternative cheaper power resources like solar and wind energies.
Pit Falls
One fear is, as more companies pledge to zero out their emissions by 2050, they could cleverly hide behind an uncertain promise of removing carbon later, to avoid cutting emissions deeply today. Scientists feel that Direct Air Capture technology has a role to play in sectors where it’s very difficult to decarbonise or are heavily polluting the atmosphere, but it can’t be taken as an excuse for everyone to keep emitting greenhouse gases indefinitely. However, industries like Cement manufacturing, long – distance shipping, air travel etc. are bound to release huge quantities of carbon dioxide to the air, and hence can embrace this technology. Anyway, it is not a panacea for Global warming threats and climate change.
Conclusion
Our primary concern should be to use more and more renewable power or improving energy efficiency by cutting down greenhouse gases. It’s wise to prevent emissions in the first place than it is, to pull back carbon dioxide after its diffused into the already polluted atmosphere.
The bottom line is that ‘direct air capture’Â is still a new technology and, while it shows enormous potential for scaling up, these systems are the first of their kind and need public support and cost control, to make it result-oriented.
JAI HIND Â