Carbon Dioxide Removal Options: A Literature Review Identifying Carbon Removal Potentials and Costs
dc.contributor.author | Johnson, Katelyn | |
dc.contributor.author | Martin, Derek | |
dc.contributor.author | Zhang, Xilin | |
dc.contributor.author | DeYoung, Carissa | |
dc.contributor.author | Stolberg, Andrew | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Bierbaum, Rosina | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-26T15:20:08Z | |
dc.date.available | NO_RESTRICTION | en_US |
dc.date.available | 2017-04-26T15:20:08Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2017-04 | |
dc.identifier | 315 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/136610 | |
dc.description.abstract | In 2015, nearly 190 countries came together in the historic Paris agreement to take action in minimizing the impacts of climate change. However, even with the consensus to cut carbon emissions, the continued trajectory of global emissions will push global temperatures 2°C past pre-industrial temperatures. Implementation of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) options is a way to meet the target. Through an extensive literature review, ten CDR/storage options were examined to gain a better understanding of the current state of research regarding the CDR potential of each option and their relevant costs, as well as the feasibility of their implementation. As we have concluded that all options require significant further research, a second major objective was to highlight where major gaps in research exist in order to help guide further inquiry in CDR options. Every option was examined extensively and presented in an individual chapter. Each chapter presents our findings regarding the CDR/storage potential and economic costs collected for each option. In addition, each chapter includes a discussion of the technical or natural process, geographic restrictions, policy implications, benefits and risks associated with the implementation, as well as recommendations for further research. The biggest takeaways from the literature review is that this set of CDR options offer enough removal potential to warrant equal consideration to other emission reduction measures, all options face limitations and uncertainties so a diverse portfolio of options should be pursued, and implementation should occur in a staged manner, in which options are implemented as they become feasible. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.subject | carbon dioxide removal | en_US |
dc.subject | negative emissions | en_US |
dc.subject | climate change | en_US |
dc.subject | CO2 | en_US |
dc.title | Carbon Dioxide Removal Options: A Literature Review Identifying Carbon Removal Potentials and Costs | en_US |
dc.type | Project | en_US |
dc.description.thesisdegreename | Master of Science (MS) | en_US |
dc.description.thesisdegreediscipline | Natural Resources and Environment | en_US |
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantor | University of Michigan | en_US |
dc.contributor.committeemember | DeCicco, John | |
dc.identifier.uniqname | kdjohns | en_US |
dc.identifier.uniqname | demarti | en_US |
dc.identifier.uniqname | xilinzh | en_US |
dc.identifier.uniqname | deyoungc | en_US |
dc.identifier.uniqname | astolber | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136610/1/315_CarbonDioxideRemovalOptions.pdf | |
dc.owningcollname | Dissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's) |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.