Not all forms of carbon removal are created equal
Not all forms of carbon removal are created equal
By Aissa Dearing | Published: 2024-12-22 18:00:00 | Source: The Present – Big Think
Sign up for Big Think on Substack
The most surprising and impactful new stories delivered to your inbox every week for free.
It has been suggested that climate change is simply human-induced The problem of poor waste management. In comparing carbon to wastewater, scientists emphasized that tools and technologies must be developed to engineer carbon out of the atmosphere and into sinks within the geosphere and biosphere.
While this sounds like a horrific technical solution to some, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded that it is There is a great need for negative emissions technologies at the industrial level (at a volume of 1.25 billion tons per year) to stay under the 1.5°C global temperature target set by 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. said Miles Allen, Director Oxford Net Zero Group (ONZ) A leading geophysicist at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), he once declared:We must stop fossil fuels causing global warming before the world stops using fossil fuels“It’s no longer just science fiction: burning fossil fuels has opened up a reservoir of carbon that far exceeds nature’s ability to sequester it.
This means that forms of human-enhanced carbon capture that would increase the planet’s ability to “recycle” carbon – without raising global surface temperatures – are up for immediate discussion and implementation. But while it seems necessary to unlock carbon-capable carbon stores over timescales equivalent to fossil fuels, this solution obscures the offsetting function of these technologies; It cannot simply be a matter of restoring the “carbon budget”. How can we decarbonize in a way that moves toward a liberating future for communities that have faced disproportionate harm from the anthropogenic climate crisis?
Many equity issues surround the concept of access to “Net zero“, which ONZ defines as”The state in which greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere are balanced by removals outside the atmosphereOver the past two centuries, developed countries, consisting of former and current colonial powers, have historically emitted a greater share of fossil fuel-based emissions and contributed disproportionately to deforestation for natural resource extraction with the United States still estimated to rank first in terms of per capita emissions. Responsible for 20 percent of cumulative carbon emissions over the past two centuries.
As underdeveloped countries continue to industrialize this century, emitting a fraction of fossil fuel and land-use change emissions than their counterparts, they are being punished by intergovernmental organizations now looking to impose tough climate targets. Climate goals, regardless of the global history of uneven development, have supported the apolitical and ahistorical framework often associated with the anthropogenic climate crisis. Here’s the difference between Well-being and survival emissions They appear, although homogeneously, in international carbon issues, where emissions from subsistence activities are judged to be given the same weight as those from high-emission cars and air travel.
Negative emissions technologies, whether nature-based or otherwise, have the potential to create an equitable distribution of carbon to make room for societies that have not yet industrialized, while also mitigating anthropogenic climate change that can still be avoided. But some companies and government agencies see the atmosphere as a new commodity frontier, shaping how carbon removal technology is developed. Climate scientists Adam J. Bumpus and Diana M. Liverman argue That companies were more focused on the opportunity to reduce costs by deferring responsibility for decarbonisation elsewhere through carbon markets and offsetting rather than on decarbonisation practices within their organisations. The carbon market and compensation system have created “carbon cowboys” and perpetuated forms of neo-colonialism, land grabbing, and further undermined the power and sovereignty of vulnerable communities around the world.
However, not all forms of carbon removal are created equal. Perhaps, in dreaming of a new future of sustainable development, societies can focus on developing carbon infrastructure Life-giving, abundant, and nourishing While returning land to communities that have faced historical injustices and prioritizing their well-being. Land-oriented decarbonization, such as restoring wetlands, promoting holistic nature restoration strategies, and using agroecological techniques, could put the role of decarbonization back in the hands of land stewards everywhere.
Borrowing from scholarships on the principle of “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)” Allen and co-authors Stuart Jenkins, Margaret Kuijper, Hugh Hilferty, and Cécile Girardin We propose to hold producers accountable by requiring them to “provide or contribute to the prevention and management of waste generated” throughout the life cycle of fossil fuels. Environmental social science scholars Andrew Bergman, Holly-Jane Buck, Olufami O. Tawoyo, and Tuli Renberg suggest that Even industrial-scale decarbonization technologies can become more democratic, decentralized, and friendlier To ensure that everyone has a say (and a part!) in the development of the decarbonisation process. This does not merely look to diversify existing carbon supply chains or give the state absolute control over carbon development. Instead, it challenges us to truly change the way we think about carbon ownership, normalizing patterns of carbon-intensive consumption, and responsibility for carbon production. What might mobilizing and compensating communities to support carbon reduction efforts look like, ensuring they have sovereignty and agency over their participation in decarbonisation development?
The pursuit of decarbonization technologies within the transformation and abundance agenda brings us to a critical crossroads in addressing the environmental crisis and historical (and current) injustices. As mitigation of anthropogenic climate change becomes more imperative, the discourse surrounding decarbonization often revolves around technological solutions and achieving net zero. However, the essence of this endeavor goes beyond just the carbon balance in the atmosphere; It involves correcting imbalances and embedding equity into the fabric of these solutions, creating an entirely new carbon future.
this condition appeared on JSTOR DailyWhere news meets its scientific counterpart.
Sign up for Big Think on Substack
The most surprising and impactful new stories delivered to your inbox every week for free.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
