Document summarizes key themes and most important ideas from an article published in the journal Nature Communications entitled "Revisiting the soil carbon saturation (more…)

This document, entitled "Unblocking energy potential certificates: the key to greener buildings" discusses the importance of the role of energy performance certificates (EPC) in improving energy efficiency (more…)

This document, published in the Journal of Sustainable Tourism, addresses the issue of promoting pro-environmental behavior in the field of catering in hotel facilities (more…)

This research document analyzes in detail the long-term impact of tree diversity on carbon stocks and flows in the Sardinilla Tropical Forest Experiment in Panama, part of a global network of experiments (more…)

Planting trees remains one of the most effective ways to remove carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere, although it is associated with climate and economic uncertainties, experts say in a new study. (more…)

Document, “Observing Anthropogenic and Biogenic CO2 Emissions in Los Angeles Using a Dense Sensor Network,” written by Jinsol Kim et al., deals with the quantification of urban CO2 emissions (more…)

Scientists have devised an affordable way to permanently remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by transforming common minerals into highly reactive substances that spontaneously lock up CO2.

This breakthrough could play a key role in limiting global warming by addressing one of its primary causes.

The new technique was developed by chemists at Stanford University. Matthew Kanan, professor of chemistry and lead author of the paper, explained the motivation for the carbon capture research. (Andrei Ionescu, more at earth.com)

New study suggests that reintroducing wolves to the Scottish Highlands could have a major impact on reducing carbon emissions and restoring native forestsThe research, published in the journal Ecological (more…)

Cyclic and single-shot approaches to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) differ in their advantages and disadvantages, particularly in terms of energy intensity, environmental impact, and scalability. (more…)

Research work  demonstrates photoelectrochemical (PEC) synthesis of hydrocarbons by coupling a structured copper nanoflower catalyst with a high photovoltage perovskite light absorber. (more…)

Directly capturing CO2 from the air and using it to produce solar fuel in a flow-through process is an innovative approach to reducing atmospheric CO2 levels. Traditional methods of storing CO2 have uncertain long-term consequences, so this (more…)

CDR systems can be conceptually divided into two basic types: cyclical and "use-once". Cyclic CDR systems use a single material to repeatedly capture CO₂, which is regenerated and reused after CO₂ extraction, while “once-used” systems use a material that reacts with CO₂ only once and is then distributed into the environment. Cyclic systems are more energy intensive.

• Cyclic CDR systems, such as chemical direct air capture (DAC), repeatedly reuse a single batch of CO₂ capture material in a cyclic process. After a material has captured a certain amount of CO₂, the CO₂ is extracted (typically using heat), the CO₂ is separated into a relatively clean stream suitable for storage (geological sequestration or mineralization), and the material is reused in the next cycle. The main input (apart from air) for cyclic systems is energy. Cyclic systems have a minimum energy requirement given by the second law of thermodynamics. Hybrid (technical/biological) carbon capture systems, such as BECCS, where the output is essentially a clean stream of CO₂, are also essentially cyclic systems when the entire set of processes, including the initial photosynthesis by plants, is considered.
• "Once-used" CDR systems, such as accelerated rock weathering (ERW) and ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE), use materials that are out of equilibrium with the atmosphere, such as alkaline minerals extracted from the ground or certain types of industrial by-products. After processing, this material is widely distributed and allowed to react with atmospheric CO₂ to sequester the carbon. The output of a “use-once” process is a modified version of the input material that cannot be easily reused to capture additional carbon. “Use-once” systems do not have the same minimum energy input requirements as cyclical systems. However, they still have significant energy needs (e.g., crushing and transporting the material). Because the output of these systems is not pure CO₂ and in many cases ends up widely distributed on land or in the ocean, complicated environmental and ecological issues need to be considered.
• Spring

Researchers from Rothamsted Research and the Agricultural Research Service have revealed that the environmental footprint of grass-fed beef production can be reduced by up to 26 % through the implementation of various mitigation techniques. (more…)

Chemical direct air extraction (DAC) is a carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technology that involves removing CO₂ directly from the air using a working material, such as a solid sorbent or a liquid solvent. In chemical DAC systems, large volumes of air are brought into contact with materials that bind CO₂. After the sorbent/solvent is saturated with CO₂, the material is isolated from the air and the CO₂ is extracted. This regenerates the working material for use in the next extraction cycle. The CO₂ is then sequestered (DACCS) or, if desired, utilized for industrial purposes (DACCU).

Main advantages of DAC chemical systems:

• Simple output: DAC chemical devices produce concentrated CO₂ outputs that are easy to measure. The output is a relatively pure stream of CO₂.
• Less impact on land area: DAC chemical plants have a significantly smaller land footprint than most terrestrial CDR systems, whether single-use or biological systems of comparable capacity. Even when DAC systems are powered by specialized renewable energy systems, such as a solar array, the land footprint required is still smaller than that required for other approaches, such as BECCS.
• Location flexibility: Facilities can be located to optimize the availability of waste heat or renewable energy sources, water requirements, proximity to CO₂ sequestration sites, operating environment (such as temperature and humidity), and geopolitical considerations.
• Manageable Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV): MRV should be more straightforward for DAC chemical facilities than for most other large-scale proposed CDR systems.

Spring

A message The American Physical Society (APS) January 2025 paper on Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) provides an overview of CDR methods and their underlying physical limitations. It focuses on CDR approaches that have (more…)

Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT are offering Carbon Sequestration 2025 Fellowships for Masters and PhD students of all nationalities. These 4-month scientific internships are intended to advance research into improving the sequestration of organic carbon in soil, which is essential in the fight against the global climate crisis.

Atmospheric wind is main source of energy for global ocean circulation. Although wind supplies energy to the ocean in the range of large gyres, most of the kinetic energy is concentrated in mesoscales, (more…)

Study analyzes different carbon dioxide removal (CDR) portfolios to achieve the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. It compares individual CDR methods (BECCS, afforestation, DACCS, biochar, enhanced weathering) and their combinations, assessing their impacts on land and energy use and economic costs. Here are the most frequently asked FAQs with detailed answers, based on the resources provided:

Questions and answers

1. What is CDR and why is it important for achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement? Answer: CDR, or carbon dioxide removal, involves technologies and processes that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere. This is essential because even with drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, an additional way is needed to achieve the Paris Agreement goals of keeping global temperature increases below 1.5°C or 2°C. CDR complements emissions reduction efforts, especially when “negative emissions” are needed to offset remaining emissions. CDR methods include BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage), afforestation/reforestation, DACCS (direct carbon capture from the air), biochar, and accelerated weathering.
2. Why shouldn't we rely on just one CDR method? Answer: Relying on a single CDR method, such as BECCS, exposes climate strategies to technological, institutional and ecological pressures. Each method has its own unique characteristics, advantages, disadvantages and limitations in terms of mitigation potential, costs, co-benefits and adverse side-effects. For example, large-scale deployment of BECCS may lead to conflicts over land use (for both food and carbon sequestration) and energy (bioenergy production), which calls into question its feasibility and sustainability. Therefore, diversification of the CDR portfolio is important.
3. What are the key elements of a diversified CDR portfolio? Answer: A diversified CDR portfolio combines different methods, such as BECCS, afforestation/reforestation, DACCS, biochar and accelerated weathering. Such an approach allows for: * Reducing over-reliance on a single technology, * Reducing and redistributing land and energy impacts, * Cost-effectiveness in achieving negative emissions, * Adapting to regional conditions and biophysical characteristics. Diversification also reduces the risk of negative environmental impacts, logistics and liability.
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using BECCS and biochar as CDR methods? Answer: * BECCS (Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage): BECCS combines bioenergy production with subsequent capture and storage of the released CO2. It has a high CO2 capture efficiency per unit of land. However, it requires extensive land use for biomass cultivation, which creates competition with agriculture and can impact food security and increase crop prices. * Biochar: Biochar is a type of coal obtained from biomass through the process of pyrolysis. It is stable in soil for a long time. It can improve soil quality, water retention, nutrient availability and crop production, and also reduce N2O emissions. However, it has lower energy efficiency than BECCS and requires a large amount of land to grow biomass.
5. How do DACCS and accelerated weathering compare to soil CDR methods in terms of cost, land use, and energy intensity? Answer: * DACCS (Direct Air Carbon Capture): DACCS is a more expensive CDR method due to the high cost and energy intensity required to operate fans, regenerate sorbents, etc. However, it has a much smaller land footprint compared to BECCS and biochar, even when we factor in the energy required for operation. * Accelerated weathering: Accelerated weathering is a method that involves crushing and dispersing silicate rocks (e.g. basalt) on agricultural land or coastlines, which accelerates the processes of sequestering atmospheric CO2. Accelerated weathering has low land requirements, but is energy-intensive and requires extensive mining, processing and transportation of rocks, which has environmental and logistical impacts.
6. What impact does resource constraints have on the CDR portfolio? Answer: The limitation of natural resources (bioenergy crops and rocks for accelerated weathering) reduces the deployment of CDR methods such as BECCS, biochar and accelerated weathering. It also leads to a strategic refocusing of the CDR portfolio towards greater use of DACCS, despite it being more costly. The limitation of resources also motivates more efficient land use for bioenergy crops and reduces pressure on land and food security. Regional adaptation of the CDR portfolio becomes important in optimising the deployment of technologies in terms of cost and resource availability.
7. Why is it important to consider the protection and restoration of natural ecosystems? Answer: Protecting and restoring natural ecosystems, such as forests and grasslands, is important for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation, water and air quality, as well as for resilience to disasters and land degradation. Natural ecosystems have important, but difficult to measure, economic and environmental benefits. Preventing the loss of natural areas has a particular impact on regions such as Africa, Brazil and Latin America, as well as on the overall climate strategy, with a minimal impact on global GDP.
8. What happens if the deployment of the CDR portfolio is delayed? Answer: If the deployment of the CDR portfolio is delayed, regional carbon prices will increase dramatically, reaching more than $800 per ton of CO2. High carbon prices could cause significant economic and social problems. It is therefore essential to start deploying CDR in the short term and to put in place adequate policies and financial measures to support this process, in order to avoid a shift away from climate mitigation.

Spring

Study examines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) portfolios, which are key to achieving the Paris Agreement goals of limiting warming to 1.5°C-2°C. It assesses different CDR approaches and their combinations, including BECCS (bioenergy with CCS), afforestation/reforestation, DACCS (direct air CO2 capture), biochar and accelerated weathering.

The study highlights that Diversifying CDR approaches is the most cost-effective strategy to achieve net-zero emissions. Unlike previous focus on BECCS and AFOLU (agriculture, forestry and other land use), the study analyses a broader range of CDR options. It finds that diversification reduces over-reliance on a single approach, reduces land and energy impacts, and has fewer negative side effects.

Main findings of the study:

• Different CDR approaches have different characteristics, including mitigation potential, costs, benefits and adverse side effects.
• IAMs (Integrated Assessment Models) have so far been limited to BECCS and AFOLU, while insufficiently considering DACCS, accelerated weathering and biochar. This contrasts with the current carbon removal market, which is also showing interest in these approaches.
• Large-scale deployment of BECCS leads to controversial trade-offs in the field of energy and AFOLU.
• CDR portfolios are more viable in achieving climate goals, and their composition depends on the availability of resources, technologies and socio-political preferences.
• Strategic and regional selection of CDR reduces costs and allows for more removals.
• More diverse CDR portfolios they reduce negative side effects, thereby limiting technological reliance, institutional differences and ecological damage.

The study uses the EPPA (Economic Projection and Policy Analysis) model to analyze climate scenarios. The model was updated on biochar and accelerated weathering. Biochar is produced by pyrolysis of biomass, which stabilizes the carbon in the biomass. It improves soil quality and can replace fertilizers. Accelerated weathering accelerates natural processes that absorb CO2. Crushed rocks react with CO2, permanently removing it from the atmosphere.

The study compares the costs of different CDR approaches with existing literature and finds that the costs of DACCS are the highest, while BECCS and biochar are more cost-competitive. When evaluating different scenarios, the study found that the largest amount of CDR is achieved in the CDR portfolio scenario, where 31.5 GtCO2 is used annually by 2100. The “Only DACCS” scenario had the largest negative impact on the global economy, while the “Only BECCS”, “Only Biochar” and “Only EW” scenarios had milder impacts.

Other key insights are:

• BECCS and biochar have a significant impact on soil, while biochar requires twice as much land to grow bioenergy crops as BECCS. Conversely, DACCS and EW they have a smaller land footprint.
• DACCS and EW consume electricity, while BECCS and biochar produce it, with BECCS being more efficient than biochar.
• Resource-constrained scenario reduces CDR deployment, but shifts emphasis to BECCS and DACCS, and minimizes impact on land.
• Preservation of natural ecosystems has minimal negative economic impact, and could protect significant areas of natural forests and grasslands.
• CDR deployment delay would lead to a significant increase in carbon prices, highlighting the importance of timely policy and financial action.

The study also highlights the need for further research into modelling the potential agricultural benefits of biochar and accelerated weathering. In conclusion, diversifying CDR approaches, and taking into account regional specificities, is key to cost-effectively achieving net-zero emissions targets while reducing the negative impact on resources. Spring

Glossary of key terms

• Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) (Carbon dioxide removal): Activities that remove CO2 from the atmosphere and store it to mitigate climate change.
• Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) (Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage): A technology that uses biomass to produce energy and captures CO2 emissions from the process and stores them underground.
• Afforestation/Reforestation (AFOLU) (Afforestation/reforestation): Planting new trees or restoring existing forests to absorb atmospheric CO2.
• Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) (Direct Carbon Capture and Storage): A technology that directly captures CO2 from the air and stores it underground.
• Biochar: Charcoal made from biomass through pyrolysis, which stores carbon in the soil and improves its properties.
• Enhanced Weathering (EW) (Rock Weathering): Accelerating the natural process of CO2 absorption by crushing and dispersing silicate rocks.
• Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) (Integrated Assessment Model): A computer model that combines knowledge from different scientific disciplines to analyze complex problems such as climate change.
• Net Zero (Net Zero): A state in which greenhouse gas emissions are balanced by the removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, so that there is no net contribution to global warming.
• Paris Agreement (Paris Agreement): A 2015 international climate change agreement that aims to keep global warming well below 2°C, and preferably below 1.5°C.
• Mitigation Pathway (Mitigation Pathway): A scenario for future greenhouse gas emission reductions and large-scale CDR deployment over time to achieve certain climate goals.
• MRV (Measurement, Monitoring, Reporting and Verification): The process that ensures that greenhouse gas emission reductions are accurately measured, monitored and reported, and that these data are verified.
• EPPA Model: An economic model used to analyze climate strategies and their economic consequences, developed by MIT.
• Syngas: Gas produced from biomass, coal or other materials that can be used to generate energy.
• Pyrolysis (Pyrolysis): A thermochemical process that decomposes organic materials at high temperature in the absence of oxygen.
• Carbon Yield (Carbon yield): The amount of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere per hectare used to grow bioenergy crops.
• GDP (Gross Domestic Product): The total value of goods and services produced in a country during a certain period, used as a measure of economic activity.
• Nature-based Removal (Nature-based removal): Removing CO2 from the atmosphere through improved ecosystem functions.
• Techno-economic factors: Factors associated with available technologies and their economic feasibility that influence the introduction of CDR technologies.
• Bio-geophysical characteristics: Characteristics of geographic locations that influence the potential of CDR methods in given regions.

Document deals with sustainable consumption of food and other products in the EU and offers various solutions to reduce environmental impact. The document emphasizes that the food system contributes one-third to total greenhouse gas emissionsThe document was created in 2022, so some of the information in it may be outdated.

Key themes and proposals outlined in the document include:

• Sustainable food consumption: The document focuses on how we can eat more sustainably and waste less food. Suggested solutions include improving food labeling with information on the impact on health, the environment and the climate, transparency of restaurants and food vendors on food waste, and food price reassessment to reflect their impact on the environment. The document proposes agricultural transformation so that farmers use less fertilizers and pesticides and switch to organic fertilizers.
• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions: The document points out that livestock production contributes to 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with beef and cow's milk being the main contributors. In Europe, agriculture accounts for 10% of EU greenhouse gas emissions, with 60% of this coming from animal production. The document also states that household consumption accounts for almost one fifth (19.8%) of EU greenhouse gas emissions. It proposes switching to a balanced diet with less refined sugar and more plant-based foods.
• Food labeling: The document states that clear food labeling is key to the transition to a sustainable food system. Consumers are increasingly interested in information about the origin, processing and nutritional value of food. The European Commission plans to develop a framework for food labelling that will integrate nutritional, climate, environmental and social factors.
• Food waste: The document highlights that food waste is a major problem, with households are the source of 52% of all food waste in the EUIt proposes legally binding targets for reducing food waste and supporting the redistribution of surplus food.
• Food prices: According to the document, tax incentives should encourage consumers to make sustainable and healthy dietary choicesTax measures are proposed, such as the abolition of reduced VAT on animal products and an increase in VAT on plant products.
• Sustainable agriculture: The document highlights that agriculture produces 10% of the EU's greenhouse gas emissions, mainly from livestock farming and the use of fertilisers. It proposes halving the use of chemical pesticides and achieving 25% of agricultural land being organically managed by 2030.
• Sustainable consumption: The document proposes that companies and public authorities were transparent about the impact of its products and production processes on the environment and human health. It emphasizes the importance of extending warranties on electrical appliances and support for repair and reuse.
• Supply chain monitoring: The document points out that every company and product has an environmental footprint. The European Commission is proposing a regulation that would require companies reported on their sustainability performance.
• Waste from electronic devices: The document points out that it is the fastest growing type of waste in the EU. It is proposed extending the life of products, ensuring the availability of spare parts and information on durability and repair.
• Disposable plastic bottles: The document states that plastic bottles take at least 450 years to decompose. It is proposed increasing recycling of plastic bottles and achieving that they are made from at least 25% of recycled plastic by 2025.
• Conclusion: The document also encourages people to become more involved in discussions and contribute to creating a climate-neutral Europe by eating more plant-based foods, buying local and seasonal food, reducing food waste, and repairing and reusing their things.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of how we can achieve more sustainable consumption in the EU and offers concrete proposals for improving the food system, production and consumption. Spring

Glossary of key terms

• Sustainable consumption: A way of consuming goods and services that takes into account environmental, social and economic aspects and meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
• Greenhouse gases: Gases in the atmosphere that trap heat and contribute to global warming. Examples include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O).
• Food system: A complex network of activities associated with the production, processing, distribution, sale and consumption of food.
• Organic farming: An agricultural system that uses natural processes and substances, minimizes the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and protects biodiversity.
• Food waste: Food that is thrown away or spoiled at any stage of the food chain.
• Farm to Table Strategy: The European Commission's strategy aimed at creating a fair, healthy and ecological food system.
• Circular economy: An economic model that focuses on minimizing waste, reusing resources, and recycling materials to extend their lifespan.
• E-waste: Waste from electronic equipment that contains hazardous substances and precious metals, requiring special handling and recycling.
• Microplastics: Small plastic particles that are created by the breakdown of plastic materials and pose a serious environmental threat.
• Supply chain: A summary of the processes involved in the production and distribution of a product from raw materials to the final consumer.