Why Carbon Capture and Direct Air Capture Increases CO2 and Air Pollution and Should be Abandoned

Many propose investing in carbon capture and direct air capture to address climate. But these technologies should be abandoned. Hi, I’m Mark Jacobson, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Stanford University, to tell you why. Carbon capture is the use of equipment to extract carbon dioxide, or CO2, from a smokestack. Direct air capture is the use of equipment to suck CO2 from the air. Both require enormous energy and CO2 pipelines. Even in the best case of using renewables to power capture equipment, those renewables can no longer replace a fossil source. Using renewables to replace a fossil source not only reduces far more CO2 than does using the same renewables to run capture equipment, but it also eliminates air pollution from the source; fossil-fuel mining; fossil-fuel and CO2 pipelines; and capture equipment. Capturing carbon does none of this. Using renewables instead of fossils with carbon capture also eliminates the 11 percent of all energy used worldwide to mine, transport, and refine fuels, because wind and solar eliminate the need for fuel mining. Also, using electric vehicles, heat pumps, and furnaces powered by renewable electricity instead of using fossil-fuel vehicles, heaters, and furnaces and offsetting their CO2 with direct air capture, reduces world energy use and emissions by another 38 percent. In sum, capturing CO2 enormously increases CO2, air pollution, energy needs, energy costs, fossil mining, and pipelines relative to clean, renewable energy. It only extends the life of the fossil-fuel industry without helping air pollution, climate, or energy security one bit and should be abandoned.

Many propose investing in carbon capture and direct air capture to address climate. But these technologies should be abandoned. Hi, I’m Mark Jacobson, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Stanford University, to tell you why. Carbon capture is the use of equipment to extract carbon dioxide, or CO2, from a smokestack. Direct air capture is the use of equipment to suck CO2 from the air. Both require enormous energy and CO2 pipelines. Even in the best case of using renewables to power capture equipment, those renewables can no longer replace a fossil source. Using renewables to replace a fossil source not only reduces far more CO2 than does using the same renewables to run capture equipment, but it also eliminates air pollution from the source; fossil-fuel mining; fossil-fuel and CO2 pipelines; and capture equipment. Capturing carbon does none of this. Using renewables instead of fossils with carbon capture also eliminates the 11 percent of all energy used worldwide to mine, transport, and refine fuels, because wind and solar eliminate the need for fuel mining. Also, using electric vehicles, heat pumps, and furnaces powered by renewable electricity instead of using fossil-fuel vehicles, heaters, and furnaces and offsetting their CO2 with direct air capture, reduces world energy use and emissions by another 38 percent. In sum, capturing CO2 enormously increases CO2, air pollution, energy needs, energy costs, fossil mining, and pipelines relative to clean, renewable energy. It only extends the life of the fossil-fuel industry without helping air pollution, climate, or energy security one bit and should be abandoned.