Can Carbon Capture Work?

Well, define "carbon capture". And "work". And "can".

Solving climate change will require amazing new technologies. We’re talking truly futuristic stuff: Self-flying air taxis. Meat grown in a lab. Jet fuel made from pumpkins. A nuclear reactor that fits in your pocket. Fully-electrified house pets. Semi trucks woven from hemp. A personal submarine made from goose shit and melon rinds that can impregnate endangered whales. We’ll basically be living in the “Technofuture” sketch from The Dana Carvey Show.

One of the most interesting futuristic ideas is carbon capture. The technology, which is currently used in a small number of industrial settings and is in the prototype phase elsewhere, sucks carbon dioxide out of the air. The appeal is obvious, especially if you believe, as I do, that the odds are against us hitting the “two degrees Celsius” goal set by the Paris Accord. I think we’re going to blow right past that thing like it’s a white guy in the 200 meters.

The two degree goal is, of course, just a goal. It’s not like everything’s nifty at 1.9 degrees and fiery death commences at 2.1. No matter where we end up, less carbon would be better. And since carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, a long-term carbon removal project seems desirable under virtually any circumstances. A report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in 2018 called for a major push to develop carbon capture, which sparked investment and interest.

But is it feasible? Does the technology show real promise, or is this techno-idealist horseshit? What are the economic and engineering challenges, and how do they relate to policy choices? These seem like good questions for a comedian to try to answer. So here goes nothin’.