Let’s Talk Carbon
Start writing a post
News

Let’s Talk Carbon

Stay in the loop. Or should I say, cycle *ba dum tss*.

135
Let’s Talk Carbon
CC0 Public Domain

Back to basics really quick: carbon oxides are bad. Why?

Carbon dioxide makes up a teeny tiny percentage of our air (about 400 parts per million), but unlike oxygen or nitrogen, it stores heat from the sun and therefore heats up the earth. That's why carbon dioxide is called a greenhouse gas, along with other gases like methane and CFC's. Carbon is a very common substance found in fuels and wood, for example, and carbon dioxide makes up over 80% of the total emitted greenhouse gases.[UGL1] Although CO2traps less heat compared to molecules such as methane (CH4), there is way more CO2in the air and it stays in the atmosphere for longer. Back in the industrial revolution, new technology caused a huge rise in carbon emissions, leaving us now to find alternatives and leave our high-emission lifestyle.

The Paris Agreement of 2009 was a milestone that attempted a worldwide shift towards this renewed, healthier lifestyle. The agreement can be boiled down to two points:

1. A maximum world temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius, with an effort to keep it at a 1.5-degree increase

2. Working towards net-zero carbon emissions, or carbon neutrality

Because it's so difficult to measure 2-degree increase in average (some say it takes up to 30 years after a certain time for scientists to safely determine the temperature increase of that time), a "carbon budget" was set up to limit the world carbon emission a 1 trillion tonnes[UGL2] , which is the estimated mass of carbon dioxide emission that would still allow us to meet the 2-degree goal.

Ladies and Gentlemen, as of 2017, we've used up 75% of said budget. [UGL3]

Our pockets are running dry, and fast.

Now, for the staying in the loop- excuse me - cyclepart. There are many methods people are employing to reduce carbon emissions. One is more controversial than most: CCS.

CCS: Carbon Capture Storage.

Just like the name suggests, it's a technology that traps carbon emissions and stores it. Typically, underground or at the bed of the sea. Theoretically speaking, leaving the storage tank at the seabed is supposed to be relatively harmless.

When I first heard about CCS, it was at a presentation delivered by the CSR head of Company X (yes, yes Company X is a pseudonym). Company X is widely known and incredibly successful in its field. Unfortunately, this field is one that happens to "facilitate" carbon emissions. They might not be direct emitters themselves, but they do collaborate with other clients that do. Nevertheless, Company X strives to be a leader in sustainable efforts in their field. They pride themselves in using LED lights (which is such an achievement, since Company X is actually saving money by using LEDs) and encouraging carbon pricing (i.e. taxing the emission of carbon, which by the way is not burden for Company X but for the government to enforce the policy. Plus, since Company X does not directly produce carbons, their clients would have been taxed, but Company X would get away spot-free). Company X also advocates Carbon Capture Storage, because they claim that it would be able to reduce the emissions in the air by 30%.

My initial thought when addressed with this proposal was, "What? Dump a bunch of waste into a tank and sink it to the bottom of the sea, then leave it there?" Turns out, the mainstream population who had learnt about CCS had the same reaction. It seems unjust to simply bury our mistakes and get on with our lives. After all, we thought, wasn't the point of reducing carbon emissions to switch over to renewable energy, which is healthier for the world?

I didn't hear the term Carbon Capture Storageuntil months later when a visiting scholar came to Penn. His name was Oliver Geden[UGL4] , and he was a head researcher specializing in Climate Policy hailing from Germany. Oliver mentioned CCS when pointing out some ways that countries are attempting to reduce carbon emissions. Frankly, I was confused when he mentioned CCS, because I had such a negative perspective of it. After exchanging emails, Oliver graciously welcomed me into office to entertain my questions.

Warmly, Oliver explained that CCS had an incredibly negative feedback from the public because NGO's had done their work in creating an "evil" reputation for it. He said that although catching carbon dioxide from the air was incredibly difficult and probably costly, it made sense for some factories to store their carbon emissions. The production of some of the most basic human needs emit some amount of carbon. For example, the production of cement.

This carbon could then be used for other things, like Enhanced Oil Recovery, or EOR. EOR is a process of injecting carbon dioxide into oil reservoirs to extract oil more efficiently (it has to do with carbon dioxide acting as a sort of solvent), and has been around since the 70s. Now, if you're wondering, "wouldn't storing the CO2 for Enhanced Oil Recovery use only throw us back into the loop of emissions?" Well…

In his lecture, Oliver also mentioned Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture Storage, or BECCS for short. All these abbreviations making your head spin yet?

Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture Storage (BECCS)Dan Sanchez et. al

Biomass, as one may already know, are organic materials that stores energy from the sun. Plants are examples of biomass. When we burn this biomass to create energy, it's considered a renewable source of energy. BECCS combines Biomass with Carbon Capture Storageby channeling the carbons emitted from burning biomass back to the growing plants which take in carbon dioxide to photosynthesize and grow. Scientists have claimed that BECCS can be the solution to ridding of carbons because it can be a carbon-negative system.

EOR and BECCS are just two examples of how stored carbons could be used, although it's quite obvious to me that the second alternative is more desirable. Of course, there is always the counterargument that CCS might cause a delay in the renewable energy transition. On the other hand, it may be crucial for us to consider other options at this time as the temperature continues to climb, or deploy multiple carbon emissions-reducing tactics simultaneously. Although this slight difference may not seem as significant in some places, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia is dying off, the Amazon is drying up, and cities like Rio and Jakarta are facing major floods.

Personally, I'm still somewhat cautious when it comes to CCS.

While the optimist in me still thinks that it's possible to offset all the damage done across decades by transitioning into renewables, I believe it is important to stay informed on all the different alternatives that technology has now allowed us to consider.With climate change growing worse and as proven by the extreme storms, it's our responsibility as a generation of resilient, connected, tech-savvy and empowered youths to see this problem through.

Please feel free to shoot me an email at gabriellelynn.utomo@yahoo.com.sg if you're curious about the topic and would like to chat! I'd be happy to share my thoughts with you :)

Sources:

[UGL1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases

[UGL2] https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/WRI13-IPCCinfographic-FINAL_web.png

[UGL3] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2017/jan/19/carbon-countdown-clock-how-much-of-the-worlds-carbon-budget-have-we-spent

[UGL4]https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/scientist-detail/oliver-geden/

Report this Content
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
Featured

The Blessing of Lacking Sex Appeal

To all the fellow non "it" girls out there

300
kozepsuli.hu

Lacking sex appeal is not a desirable thing. It makes you fee not ugly, but wrong. Not having charisma is not a life goal. It doesn't make you fee friendless, but isolated. Not being the "it" girl happens, and tonight (and every nigh prior to this)

Keep Reading... Show less
Swoon

Confessions From the Single Friend of the Group

It is truly the worst place to be

3239
Confessions From the Single Friend of the Group

Look. If you are anything like me, complaining about being single is such a hard thing to because you are genuinely happy for your friends, but as they continue to be happy in their relationships, the ever crushing weight of being the single friends can become overwhelming. For context, my primary friend group consists of four people. We are all roommates and it is a great time here. All three of my roommates have boyfriends/girlfriends, which makes our friend group of four quickly jump to seven, and it is wonderful! I love my roommates so much and I love their S.O's, but no matter how much I love them I always get extremely jealous and sad. The sad thing is that the only part that ever truly ends up bugging me is that since I am single, they are my go-to top priorities and it has been really hard to watch myself slip from the top of their go-to's to not being their go to when they feel the weight of the world. What makes it harder is that expressing that I feel alone and unwanted makes me sound jealous and like I don't want my friends to hangout with their people. I get it. I do. But there are just days I want to be someone's first pick and I'm not.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Aretha Franklin Will Forever Be A Detroit Legend, I'm Proud To Share A Hometown With Her

Aretha Franklin lost her battle to pancreatic cancer, so we stop to reflect on her powerful journey.

5609
Aretha Franklin Will Forever Be A Detroit Legend, I'm Proud To Share A Hometown With Her

Recently, Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul, passed away. Ms. Franklin grew up singing in her church's choir in Detroit. Over the years, she decided to make singing a career, first signing to Columbia Records at 18. Years later, she signed with Atlantic Records where her most powerful tunes, such as "Respect," are remembered to this day. Her breathtaking vocals earned her 18 Grammy Awards and made her one of the best-selling artists of all time.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Life Before Emancipation

Contraband Camps in Harpers Ferry

6919

When the Civil War first broke out, the United States Army sought to preserve the Union, and did not have intentions on interfering with the institution of slavery in the rebellious states. In fact, in his first inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln promised not to interfere with slavery in the places where it already existed. Of course, at the time of this address, Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee had yet to secede, so he needed to keep a moderate stance. When the U.S. Army moved into states in rebellion, generals ensured civilians that they would not interfere with slavery, and would even hep quell potential uprisings. On May 22, 1861, this attitude towards slavery began to change. Prior to then, slaves who escaped into Union lines could be returned to their masters. In some cases, troops with more abolitionist leanings would aid the runaways, but it was not yet the norm. However on May 22, three runaway slaves approached Fort Monroe along the James River seeking refuge. The slaves stated that they were about to be sent South to work on the Confederate coastal defenses in the Carolinas. Instead of returning the slaves to their masters, the commander of the fort, Benjamin Butler, claimed the slaves were contraband of war and put them to work in support of the United States. He wrote Winfield Scott, general-in-chief of all federal armies, "Shall [the enemy] be allowed the use of this property against the United States and we not be allowed its use in aid of the United States?" Following Butler's actions, 900 more slaves would gather in Fort Monroe. Congress would back Butler's stance with the First Confiscation Act in August of 1861.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Juneteenth: The Overlooked 'Independence Day'

If we can't celebrate different types of people and rejoice with them in their season of glee and jubilation, then what kind of "land of the free" is this, anyway?

3665
News Desk

I want to begin this article by saying that I was raised to be about as patriotic as it gets. I was born and bred in the "Bible belt" where we learned to say "thank you for your service" before we could even comprehend what those words truly meant. My father is a highly respected and high-ranking Houston firefighter, and he is following in the footsteps of three prior generations of Houston firefighters within our direct lineage. My maternal grandfather served in the U.S. Army, and I have multiple family members and personal friends who have served and/or are currently serving in our nation's military. And lastly (probably most important), my husband is currently serving as a Sergeant in the U.S. Army, as well. So I think it goes without saying that I have the utmost admiration and respect for public servants and first responders of all kinds.

I love our nation's military and I love this nation. But I am not a blind patriot with my head stuck in the sand. I will always support our troops, but I will very rarely support the ugly wars that we fight (both literal and figurative) across national borders and/or within our own walls.

I will be the first person to admit that this great nation in which we love so dearly is filled with hatred, ugly politics, extreme corruption and institutionalized oppression and racism (just to name a few). I love America and I am grateful that I live here, but I am not blind to America's obvious flaws.

War and political nonsense aside though, I think it is worth noting that America is already great, but let's not be ignorant, America is certainly not the "land of the free" for every race, religion and sexual orientation out there. So let's stop treating it as such. The sooner we can recognize our legitimate internal problems, the better off we will be. Our gullibility is getting us nowhere.

Keep Reading... Show less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Facebook Comments