"Negative Emissions": Burning trees, burying the CO2

EU Green Proposal: Burn the world's forests to save Nature
EU Green Proposal: Burn the world’s forests to save Nature

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Guardian reports that the leaders of the European Union have asked the UN for advice about “negative emissions”. The “negative emissions” proposal is like regular Carbon Capture and Storage, except more unworkable.

EU says 1.5C global warming target depends on ‘negative emissions’ technology

EU climate chief says that aspirational 1.5C target was put into Paris climate deal at insistence of ‘most exposed countries’ and will require new strategies.

The EU has admitted it has not yet looked into the polices needed to hold global warming to 1.5C, as agreed at the landmark Paris agreement, and will instead ask a UN climate science panel for advice involving “negative emissions” technology.

The bloc’s negotiators had gone to Paris with a mandate for a 2C target but were forced to accommodate more ambitious demands from “the most exposed countries”, the bloc’s climate chief, Miguel Arias Cañete, said.

Several small island states could be swallowed by rising seas if the planet warms by 2C, scientists believe.

“For sure, 1.5C is a trajectory of full decarbonisation and will require accelerated strategies and pathways,” Cañete told a Brussels press conference. “About negative emissions, the IPCC [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] will say when and how.”

Negative emissions can refer to geoengineering but usually means the mass deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies which bury CO2 in underground fissures. These would be fixed to power plants powered by “carbon neutral” bioenergy, which removes carbon from the air as it grows. More carbon would be saved than re-released into the atmosphere, the theory goes, so creating net zero emissions.

But the idea has proved controversial, with Kevin Anderson, the deputy director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change branding negative emissions “highly speculative” over the weekend.

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/14/eu-says-15c-global-warming-target-depends-on-negative-emissions-technology

It is noteworthy that even the über green Tyndall Centre thinks this is a daft idea.

Wouldn’t it be nice if politicians, who in the West usually have a legal rather than a scientific background, ran their ideas past a few engineers before announcing their latest inspiration?

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

124 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Logoswrench
December 16, 2015 8:37 am

Next up harnessing worm holes, the warp drive, and the transporter. Jackasses.

Marcus
Reply to  Logoswrench
December 16, 2015 8:59 am

+ 10,000

tommoriarty
December 16, 2015 9:50 am

On one hand we are supposed to reduce carbon emissions. On the other hand we should recycle paper products.
Wouldn’t it be better to use lots of paper products and bury them in a very deep landfill to after they are used. This would reduce atmospheric carbon.

RockyRoad
Reply to  tommoriarty
December 16, 2015 11:42 am

The CO2 humanity has supposedly added to the atmosphere now contributes an additional 15% (considered to be worth $1.5 Trillion per year) in foodstuff production world-wide since it acts as a plant fertilizer.
Conversely, if you remove it, that benefit from our CO2 will also be eliminated.
So no, it wouldn’t be better to use any method to reduce CO2 because it would have a negative impact on humanity.
But then, I believe such plans are designed to be. Look at the people driving this meme.

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 11:47 am

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

RockyRoad
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:23 pm

Of course it does, Buster. But any farmer worth his salt can eliminate the weeds. Besides, if you’re a cattleman, weed lots turn into grass lots with proper management. Without the CO2, there would be less of all plants and, by projection, animals, including us.

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:26 pm

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:44 pm

BusterBrown@hotmail.com:
You having disrupted another thread with nonsense, I see have now come here to do the same.
RockyRoad said

Of course it does {i.e. extra CO2 fertilizes weed growth}, Buster. But any farmer worth his salt can eliminate the weeds. Besides, if you’re a cattleman, weed lots turn into grass lots with proper management. Without the CO2, there would be less of all plants and, by projection, animals, including us

and you replied

I see your point RockyRoad. What you are saying is that it’s the effort of the farmer, and not the increased CO2 that enhances the yield.

Your reply is a non sequitur .
RockyRoad, did NOT say, suggest or imply that ” it’s the effort of the farmer, and not the increased CO2 that enhances the yield”. He said the exact opposite of what you claim he did.
RockyRoad said “Without the CO2, there would be less of all plants” including both crops and weeds and “any farmer worth his salt can eliminate the weeds” while “weed lots turn into grass lots with proper management”. In other words, there is a great net benefit with very little additional effort required to eliminate the additional weeds and to harvest the additional crops.
BusterBrown, your disruptive, irrational behaviour is annoying.

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Richard

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:50 pm

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:54 pm

BusterBrown@hotmail.com:
Please “ignore” everybody. That way threads will not be disrupted with your tripe.
Richard

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 2:57 pm

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 3:01 pm

BusterBrown@hotmail.com:
Given a choice between
(a) ignoring me applauding your claim that you would ignore me
or
(b) posting more tripe
you predictably posted more tripe (sigh).
Richard

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 3:03 pm

Richard,…
(Reply: You seem to be the one threadbombing here. -mod)

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 3:11 pm

BusterBrown@hotmail.com:
As in the other thread, I explained that you had posted untrue nonsense. Your response was to pretend to be offended. And also as in the other thread, your behaviour demonstrates you know you know you posted untrue nonsense (I suspect deliberately and to be disruptive).
Pointing out that you have posted tripe is NOT disruption. Your tripe IS disruption and it is clearly intended to be.
Please try to write something constructive or write nothing.
Richard

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

BusterBrown@hotmail.com
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 16, 2015 3:13 pm

(Note: “Buster Brown” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. Therefore, all the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

David A
Reply to  RockyRoad
December 17, 2015 3:39 am

Buster, Richard C is correct. Logical, you are not.

blunderbunny
Reply to  tommoriarty
December 17, 2015 2:48 am

Yep, if the paper comes from a sustainable resource… this would sequester carbon. Also, some one raised the issue of decomposition and methane. Solutions to this are also simple, either pyrolyse before burial or cap the landfill and then burn-off any methane produced, again this can be used to heat homes or for small scale energy production.
One of the worst things you can do, environmentally speaking, is to use recycled paper in the office. Much better to use it from sustainable resources and either then bury or burn it. Still that’s what you get when you start listening to idiots. Not all recycling is good and most people really, really don’t grasp that. Recycling glass for instance, borders on insanity. Yet it’s one of the most commonly recycled materials. Recycling aluminium and plastics on the other hand are excellent ideas and should be encouraged… still what do I know…. if you don’t subscribe to catastrophic global warming you’re apparently in league with the devil and not allowed to be interested in the planet or indeed looking after it…. Ho hum…

Editor
December 16, 2015 10:41 am

The UK Met Office would seem to agree that CCS is a waste of time.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/12/07/carbon-capture-not-the-answer-met-office/

Harry Passfield
December 16, 2015 10:55 am

The EU has admitted it has not yet looked into the polices needed to hold global warming to 1.5C

Do these people not see the level of arrogance and hubris they are displaying in assuming they can legislate the climate????? In any other walk of life these people would be sectioned for being off their trolleys.

Tom Judd
December 16, 2015 11:12 am

I recommend running the turbofan engines on Air Force One in reverse. There’s no denying that that is, by far, the most massive corporate or private jet the universe has ever seen. If you run the engines in reverse they’ll be sucking in all that CO2 they’d otherwise blow out the rear, and instead, they’ll be blowing out the front nice, clean air with no CO2 in it. Granted, Air Force One will be stuck running in reverse, but that won’t be any different than the direction the US is running with Obama at the helm.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Judd
December 16, 2015 11:34 am

A couple days ago we read that melting glaciers is causing the earth’s rate of rotation to slow down.
If that’s a problem we could solve it by taking all of the world’s planes, point them east and tie them down.
Then let them all crank up their engines to max for a day or so. That should speed up the planet’s spin enough to compensate. Problem solved.
Hat tip to Rube Goldberg.

JustAnOldGuy
December 16, 2015 11:48 am

I’d love to conduct a little thought experiment with an average, guy-off-the- street greenie. Tell him/her/it that there are 400ppm CO2 in the atmosphere right now but they have three big red buttons in front of them. If they press button number one they’ll cut that in half, 200ppm; button two halves that, 100ppm; button three gets rid of all of it. Those that press button one learn that they’ve just starved billions of people to death by seriously reducing agricultural productivity. They might shrug that off so I’d be sure to add that the reduction also applies to all the vegetation wildlife depends on. Button number two will let them initiate one of the most extensive extinctions the planet has ever known. Button number three is wipeout.

December 16, 2015 1:27 pm

Burning trees and injecting the CO2 into the ground to reduce CO2 will only work if the plan includes replacing the trees with some of those artificial trees.
A side benefit would be that every fall we can harvest the aluminum foilage!

Ta Hei Chen
December 16, 2015 3:08 pm

If they bury CO2 they also bury O2. All life on Earth will be wiped out.
[No, there is too much O2 present for the removal of the oxygen molecules with the little bit of CO2 being removed is non-measurable. .mod]

Ta Hei Chen
December 16, 2015 3:11 pm

If they bury CO2 they also bury O2. They will kill everyone.

NW sage
December 16, 2015 4:35 pm

“Wouldn’t it be nice if politicians, who in the West usually have a legal rather than a scientific background, ran their ideas past a few engineers before announcing their latest inspiration?”
This last sentence is incredible. Does anyone reasonably expect politicians/lawyers, who are trained that lying is acceptable, to actually let engineering and scientific facts get in the way of their preordained conclusions?

Greg
December 17, 2015 1:10 am

I’m confused, if CO2 generated by power stations is such a problem then surely the warming activists would be happy if we started building more nuclear power stations?

Keith Willshaw
Reply to  Greg
December 17, 2015 2:11 am

Don’t you realise that its not just Nuclear Power that’s evil but ALL Industrial civilization. These bozos wont be happy until everyone (but them) is shivering in a cave. They of course as self appointed guardians of the environment will force themselves to live with air conditioning, central heating, cars and air travel. Welcome to Feudalism Mk 2.

Proud Skeptic
December 17, 2015 5:07 am

There seem to be no limits to the foolishness of some people.

Knutsen
December 17, 2015 9:47 am

Dig up brown coal, sell it to EU that will bury it again together with tree coal. At least you create a lot of jobs. Fantastic.

Reply to  Knutsen
December 17, 2015 2:00 pm

Or, ban cars and bring back horses. Lot’s of “shovel-ready” job opportunities there too!

johann wundersamer
December 25, 2015 8:08 pm

The Green Endsieg:
google
‘serious consideration should be given to the desirability and feasability of reducing Germany to an agrarian economy wherein Germany would be a land of small farms, without large-scale
industrial enterprises.’ .
____
King Canute dared the Sea; Emperor Xerxes punished the Sea. The EU sieges reason – finally under German Leadership.
Sad* – Hans
* to tired to fall lazy.

johann wundersamer
December 25, 2015 9:43 pm

eric clapton, jack bruce, ginger baker:
Who wants the worry, the hurry
of city life?
Money, nothing funny, wasting the best of our life.
Sweet wine, haymaking,
sunshine day breaking
We can wait ’til tomorrow
Car speed, road calling, bird freed, leaf falling
We can bide time
Sweet wine, haymaking,
sunshine day breaking
We can wait ’til tomorrow
Car speed, road calling, bird freed, leaf falling
We can bide time
Who wants the worry, the hurry of city life?
Hans

johann wundersamer
December 26, 2015 1:43 am

Deutschland schafft sich ab:
Germany abolishes itself.
Hans