4.7 Article

The life cycle environmental impacts of negative emission technologies in North America

Journal

SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION
Volume 32, Issue -, Pages 880-894

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2022.06.010

Keywords

Negative emission technologies; Climate change; Life cycle assessment

Funding

  1. Sustainable Gas Institute
  2. Imperial College London

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Negative emission technologies (NETs) are important for achieving net-zero and net negative emission goals, but their environmental impacts vary depending on the context. Different NETs have different environmental impacts, and the choice should be based on specific goals.
Negative emission technologies (NETs) could play a key role in ensuring net-zero and longer-term net negative emission ambitions are met. However, greenhouse gas emissions (and other pollutants) will occur over the life cycle of a NET and will need to be taken into consideration when developing schemes to roll out their use. We compare five NETs: afforestation/reforestation (AR), enhanced weathering (EW), mangrove restoration (MR), bioenergy and direct air capture with carbon storage (BECCS and DAC), using life cycle assessment to determine their environmental impacts (global warming, freshwater, toxicity etc.). We find that there is a wide range in the environmental impacts estimated across the NETs and the context in which they are used will directly impact which NET has low or high environmental impacts. This is an important aspect to consider when deciding which NET to prioritise in strategies to roll out their use on large scales. If consistent removal of CO2 from the atmosphere is the goal, then AR and MR have the lowest environmental impacts. However, if large and quick CO2 removal is the goal then EW, DAC and BECCS have similar, if not lower, environmental impacts. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Institution of Chemical Engineers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available