Saturday 16 December 2017

Negative emissions II: Bio-energy with CCS the Saviour


.

Following COP21, nations largely in Europe are exploring the viability of deploying Bio-energy with CCS (BECCS(ie. the UK, FinlandSweden & USA). However, this change 'saviour' just won't work!

BECCS is touted as carbon-negative but many assumptions are made. Firstly, we can produce enough biomass to replace the majority of fossil-fuel produced electricity and that these would be carbon-neutral. Advocates argue that as plants absorb CO2 from the atmosphere then, burning these would not contribute to a net gain in CO2. This does not account the energy needed for growing, harvesting, processing and transporting the biomass.

Ask yourself this...

Q1.

Would you sacrifice precious land for producing biomass or for food? Especially as human population growth continues to explode towards 9.7 billion by 2050.
Q2.
Would you happily pay more for food? As competition for arable land increases.
Q3.

Q4.

Should we invest time, effort and resource into BECCS when there is no evidence to suggest it will work on a large-scale?
Q5.

Do we have enough room for food and biomass production? The illustration below, certainly suggests we don't.






2 comments:

  1. Hi, wow, I really enjoyed following you here - and your comprehensive approach when capturing the magnitude of the issues. The illustrations you used were helpful and on point! I directed people to your blog on my post on Geoengeneering so visitors can find some more questions and answers here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's great, I hope more and more people become aware about geoengineering and the risky methods scientists are looking into.

      Delete