Bringing It All Together

We hope that throughout these pages you have come to appreciate the potential of CO₂ to help our industries and technologies transition into the envisioned carbon-neutral economy of the future. Capturing CO₂, either directly from the air or from industrial waste streams, and sequestering it in highly stable forms, such as biochar or concrete, can help offset industry’s stubborn emissions that cannot be resolved by renewable energy alone. In cases where a carbon capture and utilization strategy does not permanently sequester CO₂, the strategy can still help close the carbon loop by not introducing new emissions. For example, technologies that already use CO₂ as a feed, such as EOR and dry reforming, can make use of captured carbon emissions to fuel their processes, rather than drawing from fossil reserves. Similarly, captured CO₂ , together with renewably sourced hydrogen, can replace fossil-derived feedstock to manufacture products such as methanol and polymers.

Beyond mitigating emissions, CO₂-based technologies can help support the growth of renewable energy and incentivize the development of a carbon capture infrastructure. For example, excess grid electricity can be used to convert CO₂ to fuels and chemicals, thus providing a storage option to help manage the intermittency challenge of renewable energy sources. Moreover, the capacity for CO₂ to be transformed into value-added products can render the economics of carbon capture technologies more favorable. While it is certainly not a silver bullet to climate change, integrating carbon capture, storage, and utilization with a renewable energy infrastructure can help meet, and preferably surpass, the emission targets set out by the Paris Agreement.

The exact degree to which CO₂ capture, storage, and utilization can contribute to limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C depends largely on the associated supply chains, which makes it very difficult to predict at this point. For example, the carbon footprint of many of these processes depends largely on their access to an abundant supply of renewable energy. Furthermore, even if renewable energy were used to convert CO₂ into liquid fuels, such as methanol, subsequent combustion of the fuel would inevitably release carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Just because a process captures or uses carbon emissions does not guarantee that it is carbon neutral, let alone carbon negative.

Assessing whether or not a CO₂-based technology actually helps reduce emissions is critical to ensuring its potential to mitigate climate change. At the same time, for a solution to be successful, it must be economically viable and designed in the context of the local supply chains and social capital. For example, Iceland’s infrastructure of methanol from CO₂ has a very low carbon footprint; however, this is the result of this country’s abundance of renewably sourced electricity. The same scheme may not yield the same benefit in countries where the renewable energy infrastructure is less developed. Selecting the best strategy, therefore, becomes a question of which pathways have the best prospects in terms of mitigation, commercialization, scalability, environmental sustainability, social impact, and cost. The viability of any solution can only be assessed via a complete life-cycle analysis. This tool is often used by engineers and project managers to evaluate the energy, economic, and environmental impact of a process or technology. The assessment is very thorough and typically starts at the extraction of source raw materials and carries through every stage in the processing, manufacture, transportation, distribution, use, maintenance, and ultimately disposal (and, hopefully, recycling) of the product. An analysis of this kind is crucial for identifying and evaluating the potential impacts associated with all energy and materials inputs and their outputs to the environment, making it more comprehensive in scope than a simple computation of the carbon footprint.

Life-cycle analysis: an assessment of the energy, economic, and environmental impacts of a product throughout its lifetime, cradle to grave – from the extraction of raw materials through to processing, transport, use, recycling, and disposal.

Throughout much of this discussion we will be equating concern for the environment with concern for climate change. In many ways this makes sense: climate change has major environmental repercussions by the nature of climate’s ties to temperature and weather patterns, air composition, ocean levels, soil chemistry, biodiversity, and human activity. We should point out, however, that not all emission-mitigation strategies are environmentally friendly, and not all environmental conservation efforts help mitigate emissions. For example, on the one hand, biodegradable products are excellent from an environmental standpoint: a product that naturally degrades into the environment without releasing harmful substances can help reduce waste and minimize environmental impact. On the other hand, the degradation process may involve the release of carbon dioxide or methane into the atmosphere, which, if they are not captured to form a closed loop, is not ideal from the perspective of emissions mitigation. Alternatively, one could develop the world’s best catalyst for converting captured CO₂ into polymers to make environmentally friendly plastics; however, if this catalyst were made from a toxic substance that risked being environmentally hazardous, it would probably have to be reconsidered. Performing a life-cycle analysis can help to evaluate these nuanced impacts of various “green” technologies.

Like any strategy striving for sustainability, reducing consumption must be central to CO₂ capture and utilization technology. This can be done by minimizing the amount of materials and energy needed for a process. For example, replacing a high-temperature industrial process with one that yields the same quantity of product at lower temperature can result in huge energy savings. In addition to consumption, the carbon footprint of the energy and materials feed also needs to be considered. Any heat or electricity used should ideally be derived from a renewable energy source. Another factor of particular importance to technologies that use CO₂ is the lifetime of the resulting product – that is, the length of time that the product holds carbon captive. This is extremely important when considering the impact of processes in which the primary strategy for negating emissions is sequestration.

In addition to offering environmental benefits, any viable technology or process should be scalable and economically efficient. These benefits are somewhat related in that the solution must have the potential to become widespread so that it may have as much impact as possible. Indeed, a new technology is useless if it is too complicated or too costly to be performed outside of a research laboratory.

Finally, the solution must be mindful of the safety and social well-being of everybody involved in its operation. Employing harmful materials or high-risk equipment, or failing to compensate workers with a living wage, would be in direct contradiction to the very goal of mitigation strategies, that is, the preservation of the environment and human life.

If at this point you are feeling overwhelmed by the various criteria used to evaluate the impact of CO₂-based technologies, remember that it is precisely this type of non-trivial framework that is needed for the design and implementation of truly sustainable solutions. This said, there are a few take-home messages to bear in mind. The first is that replacing fossil-derived feedstock with CO₂ is generally a good idea. The second is that the most direct incorporation of CO₂ into a product is most likely to yield the largest positive impact on its carbon footprint.226 Finally, although generalized truths about carbon capture and utilization may be alluring, we must overcome the temptation of black-and-white thinking. Ultimately a full life-cycle assessment is needed to evaluate the environmental, economic, and social merits and the emissions-reduction potential of any solution.

Making It Happen

While many carbon capture and utilization technologies have proved to offer a safe and effective carbon-neutral solution, the achievement of an appreciable economic viability is often less obvious. With few CO₂-utilization technologies available on the market until recently, it remains more economical for many industries simply to emit the CO₂ and pay the carbon tax, rather than to capture and reuse it. Only with generous and consistent investment in research, accelerated market development, and radical policy reform can the vision of a global CO₂-utilization strategy be realized.

Increased government support for research can play a huge role in accelerating the development of key technologies associated with carbon capture, storage, and utilization. For example, improving the cost and efficiency of electrolysis devices to produce renewable H₂ will be key to rendering many CO₂-conversion processes viable. Similarly, a practical and economical electrochemical technology for reducing aqueous CO₂ would provide an attractive means to make a wide range of renewable chemicals and fuels. The same goes for improving the design and efficiency of carbon capture technologies. Chemistry and engineering, in particular, are the disciplines underpinning the discovery and optimization of catalytically active materials that facilitate the transformation of CO₂ to chemicals and fuels.

Consider a historical perspective on some energy-related, world-changing breakthroughs: the first practical solar cell is only a sixty-year-old story; the first practical light-emitting diode (LED) is fifty years old; and the conversion of light and/or electricity into energy-rich fuels has been seen, for the first time, during the past forty years. None of these problems have been simple, and all of these breakthroughs have relied on the unique physical and chemical properties of metals and semiconductors.

Despite our inevitable bias on this matter as scientists, we emphasize that science provides the foundation for many new and upcoming solutions. Making chemicals and fuels from CO₂ is a problem that requires science and engineering across multiple-length scales. Continued support for both basic and applied research is therefore vital to enable society to transition toward a net-zero emissions economy.

In addition to technological challenges, the success of carbon capture, storage, and utilization will require market development. Connecting existing processes with their appropriate supply chains, fostering collaborations between research institutes and start-ups, and creating support and partnerships for new companies all will help to accelerate the shared success of environmentally sustainable industries. Consumers also can play a major role in ensuring the creation of a vibrant market for CO₂-based technologies. Public endorsement, though crucial, is an often-underestimated element in the success of a new industry. Not only is public support necessary in the short term to foster investment into companies employing CO₂-utilization technologies, but also it is key to ensuring that government commits to a long-term carbon utilization policy.

Although personal opinions may differ as to the merit of different climate-change strategies (even among technical experts), unified support is needed to reduce dramatically our emissions as fast as possible, which requires, among other strategies, building widespread renewable energy infrastructure supplemented by carbon capture, storage, and utilization technologies.

Effective communication strategies are crucial for government and companies to gain public trust when it comes to carbon capture and utilization. On this note, we can learn from past instances in which a new technology, despite being promising and robust, gained widespread unpopularity among the public. A classic example is the story of genetically modified (GM) organisms. The media message in recent years has been clear: we must avoid GM foods at all cost if we value our health and the environment. While GM organisms undeniably pose a threat to biodiversity, they do however provide a means of ensuring our global food supply.227 To further complicate matters, much of biotechnology became synonymous with multinational corporations that were notorious for exploiting small-scale farmers and forcing crop homogeneity. But the GM organisms themselves must not be confounded with the problematic history of their management, nor should their hypothetical risks be reason to cast aside their many benefits.228 There exist few technologies that can be deemed “perfect” in terms of their environmental, climatic, economic, social, and cultural impact. We must embrace the nuances, weigh the options, and assess the risk based on our priorities at hand.

Carbon capture and storage have generally not been well received in the public eye. One study found that the negative view stemmed from the perceived risks associated with storage and transportation, despite their being touted as a promising strategy to achieving the 2°C warming target.229 Interestingly, the findings revealed that carbon capture and utilization were viewed more positively, with perceived risks being related to the products themselves and their disposal. Overall, there was a low public awareness of carbon capture, storage, and utilization technologies, indicating that further communication of evidence-based knowledge on these technologies was needed. Fostering the healthy support from communities requires identifying the economic and social concerns of communities and ultimately fostering support of new technologies based on a history of trust.

Finally, no matter the existing state of technology or market space, support from government in the form of policy will be needed to help launch carbon-neutral and carbon-negative technologies. This is especially necessary in most countries and regions where the energy and industrial infrastructure is highly competitive and well established. Although one can be easily drawn into debates on the merits of free-market versus government-sanctioned approaches, a stable regulatory framework that is set in place by government is ultimately necessary in order for the private sector to thrive in a sustainable and equitable manner.

Advancing from technological readiness to actual commercial deployment can only be achieved if focused and informed policy measures are in place.230 Policy in favor of climate-change mitigation can take various forms, although media tends to place disproportionate focus on carbon-pricing mechanisms, such as cap and trade and carbon taxes. Although putting a price on carbon emissions is necessary to encourage emission reductions, a complementary mix of ambitious policy containing significant regulatory elements will ultimately be required to meet short-term emission targets. Supportive policies that can enable the initiation, promotion, and growth of CO₂ products include government tax incentives and mandates, product labeling, government-supported certification and testing, and government oversight on life-cycle assessments. Policy must also reflect the longer timeline faced by clean-technology start-ups, whose scaling and infrastructure requirements can result in projects taking eight to ten years to launch.

The good news, however, is the consensus that CO₂ utilization can be commercially viable through sustained investment and dedicated policy measures. Bearing in mind that much of the existing energy infrastructure was previously, or is currently, heavily subsidized, subsidizing the emerging industries that will help guarantee a sustained transition from our current fossil-based economy seems to be a given.

Ultimately, the demonstration of technologically and economically sensible ways of fixing CO₂ to value-added chemicals and fuels, within a reasonable time frame, will breed confidence in further private and public investment; this investment will facilitate the turning of globally significant quantities of CO₂ from being a liability to being an asset. A recent study by the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute concluded that once the economic and technical feasibility of producing hydrocarbon fuels from CO₂ has been demonstrated, this could well accelerate the growth of carbon capture and sequestration and catalyze its mature commercial exploitation.211 Knowledge dissemination through technological demonstrations will therefore be key to politicians and the public knowing about the global CO₂ utilization paradigm, which may ultimately help to inform policy decisions.

Envisioning the Economy of the Future

Our global community has been tasked to define and implement a whole-systems strategy for reducing CO₂ emissions at the gigatonne scale. Accomplishing this goal requires a holistic paradigm that makes use of all the technologies in the renewable-energy and CO₂-utilization toolbox: CO₂-conversion reactors, water-electrolysis systems, water desalination, renewable-resource harvesting, and storage technologies. The integration of all these systems will be necessary for the sustained operation of an emissions-free economy, as shown in the flow diagram in figure 19.

Figure 19. The future energy economy is one based on renewables and carbon capture, sequestration, and utilization.

What exactly will large-scale deployment of these systems look like? In truth, we do not have the answer, and the most appropriate solution is ultimately contingent on geographic location, available infrastructure, the amount of CO₂ at source, and the type and value of CO₂-based products compared to fossil-fuel-produced alternatives.

Capturing CO_2, either directly from the air or from industrial waste streams, can take many different forms. As mentioned earlier, direct-air-capture units could be integrated into heating, ventilating, and AC systems in buildings, or as dedicated commercial operations, such as those of companies like Carbon Engineering. Where the captured CO₂ might be stored or used is highly dependent on its purity. For example, chemical manufacturing typically requires a high purity grade of CO₂ because the presence of impurities (i.e., any unwanted compounds that are filtered out along with the CO₂) can risk poisoning the catalyst; in the pharmaceutical industry a contaminated source risks rendering the product itself unusable.231 So, although capturing high-purity CO₂ is more energy and cost intensive to obtain, it does pay off when it comes to utilization downstream. With this in mind, it is plausible to imagine that local need would have to be fulfilled by different grades of direct-air-capture devices – some are more expensive but able to produce pharmaceutical- grade product, and others are cheaper than, but as ubiquitous as, AC units.

How CO₂-conversion solutions might play out in practice is also subject to much imagination. The location of reactors might depend on proximity to renewable sources of H₂ and industrial-scale CO₂-capture facilities. Many questions remain as to the nature of the infrastructural changes that would be involved. Would the catalytic reactors be integrated within factories and refineries or located downstream from various industrial processes? And how would CO₂ be delivered to them? Would it be better for industrial operations to invest in on-site renewable power generation or to draw from the grid? In general, industries requiring large amounts of energy tend not to be reliant on the grid and instead employ their own power system. It may be that energy-intensive CO₂-utilization operations would install wind turbines and solar arrays dedicated to the processes, offsetting the capital expenditure costs against buying power.

The nature of the CO₂-conversion process – that is, the type of reactor needed – could also limit the location options. For example, electrochemically driven catalytic processes tend to be more compact compared to ones driven by heat. The versatility of electrochemical reactors could allow them to adopt modular designs, which could be assembled at different scales on demand. Micro catalytic reactors have the advantages of high-energy efficiency, conversion rates, and yields and provide scalable on-site demand and production with impressive process control.

Another vision is that of a modular CO₂ refinery in which various reactors convert CO₂, H₂, and methane into chemicals or liquid fuels. Hydrogen could be produced on-site from water by electrolysis, it could then be reacted with captured CO₂ or methane emissions to make synthesis gas, and the latter could ultimately produce fuels, such as methanol and gasoline. Already a spin-off company from Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany, INERATEC, has commercialized innovative compact, containerized chemical plants, which enable these processes. They are modular CO₂ refineries that convert CO₂, H₂, methane, and water into both gaseous and liquid fuels. Their modular design, comprising units that are roughly the size of shipping containers, enables interlocking construction of CO₂ refineries at multiple-length scales that can be applied to various energy-related sectors.

A more futuristic vision includes a fleet of mobile CO₂ refineries that could be powered by renewable forms of electricity, built into truck-size containers, transported, delivered and integrated on-site to industries that have elected to convert their GHG emissions into synthetic fuels. Development of these portable, self-contained, modular synthesis, testing and control systems would enable renewable heat, electrical, or solar energy to be used at different industrial sites to capture and purify CO₂ and generate hydrogen from water electrolysis. It would indeed be revolutionary to imagine that instead of having to collect and transport industrial GHG emissions to a CO₂ refinery, one could deliver mobile CO₂ refineries to the emitting industries.

Rethinking our energy and industrial infrastructure also provides an opportunity to challenge conventional models of resource production and distribution. For example, the possibility of retrofitting air conditioners to convert water and CO₂ could redefine conventional approaches to energy ownership and distribution. Users could potentially collect the fuel for their own use and redistribute the excess in some form of local fuel-trading scheme. The concreteness and cooperative spirit of using renewably sourced energy to collect and convert CO₂ to value-added fuels in homes, apartments, and offices may be more likely to gain public support than more conventional large-scale industrial projects.225 Indeed, local-level production would allow consumers to become more self-sufficient and empowered to participate in the carbon-neutral economy of the future.

Carbon capture and utilization is, of course, just one of many strategies to be undertaken to reduce our emissions, and it will be economically sustainable only if it is well integrated into the global energy landscape. Although not all countries have the technological capacity and resources to have their own refineries, all countries can still participate in the push toward synthetic fuels. For example, countries endowed with a robust renewable energy infrastructure can supply renewable electricity to countries that carry the CO₂- conversion infrastructure. There is some degree of the fossil-free solution appropriate for every location.

We began this story with the image of a chemical “tree” to conceptualize how all consumer products ultimately stem from a set of base resources. Today most chemicals necessary for the creation of everything from medicine to fertilizer to clothes still stem from fossil- derived resources. However, through these pages we hope that you have grasped the potential of substituting non-fossil alternatives for oil, natural gas, and coal. Returning to this idea, we leave you with a list of the key “root” chemicals and materials needed to sustain the manufacturing of critical commodities, and alternative procurement solutions to substitute their current fossil-fuel sourcing.

1. Methanol is a base chemical feedstock for nearly 30 percent of all chemical feedstocks, and more than 95 billion liters of methanol are produced each year. Today most methanol is still manufactured from syngas produced by catalytic reforming of fossil natural gas, and at least 0.6 kg of CO₂ is generated per kilogram produced, depending on the specific process. As we saw earlier, however, methanol can be obtained directly, by catalytically reacting CO₂ with renewably sourced H₂ gas. Alternatively, it can be manufactured from syngas derived from biomass, specifically lignocellulose, to make bio-methanol.

2. Ammonia is key to securing the global food supply, and over 175 million tonnes is produced each year. It is a precursor to commonly used nitrogen-based fertilizers, such as urea, but can also be used directly. Ammonia is industrially produced via the energy-intensive Haber-Bosch process, in which hydrogen gas (typically derived from fossil sources) is reacted with nitrogen. This results in roughly 2.8 tonnes of CO₂ being emitted per tonne of ammonia produced – the process is responsible for 1 percent of all global CO2 emissions. Reducing ammonia production’s carbon footprint can be achieved by using a sustainable hydrogen source, adopting catalyst materials to lower the heat required by the reaction, and using renewable energy forms, such as sunlight, to drive the process. Ammonia can also be produced directly from water and nitrogen, effectively eliminating the need for hydrogen gas; however, this approach is still in its infancy and demands ongoing research efforts.

3. Hydrogen gas will be critical to a low-carbon future in many ways. It powers hydrogen fuel cells, is key to enabling much CO₂-conversion chemistry, and is also critical to many industries, particularly steel. As we saw earlier, sustainable hydrogen production can take several routes, including water electrolysis, biomass pyrolysis, or simply carbon capture integrated with steam methane reforming. In all cases, abundant and reliable sources of renewably generated electricity will be crucial to bring such operation to the scale required.

4. Carbon monoxide is critical to many major industrial processes, both on its own and as a key constituent of syngas. It is used widely in chemical manufacturing and metal refinement and is vital to produce liquid hydrocarbons via the Fischer- Tropsch process. Carbon monoxide is produced industrially by several methods, the most common of which involves burning coke or other carbon-rich products that are derived from heating oil or coal. However, carbon monoxide can instead be obtained through the direct catalytic reduction of CO₂. A sustainable source of renewable energy, in the form of heat, electricity, or light, is needed to ensure that the process is carbon neutral, or even carbon negative.

5. Olefins form a key set of organic compounds, the most notable of which are ethylene and propylene. More than 150 million tonnes of ethylene is produced per year – more than any other organic compound. Olefins are the base ingredient of most plastics, surfactants, epoxides, and synthetic rubber. They are most commonly produced by heating natural gas or petroleum in a highly energy-intensive process known as steam cracking. Ethylene, however, can be obtained from bio-ethanol, which is produced from biomass, in lieu of petroleum products. Most recently, researchers have demonstrated that it can alternatively be obtained via the electrochemical catalytic reduction of CO₂.232

6. BTX aromatics are another critical set of organic compounds used in chemical manufacturing, the most important of which are benzene, toluene, and xylenes (hence, BTX). They are key to manufacturing plastics and polymers and are produced at a rate of over 100 million tonnes per year. The most common industrial route to obtain aromatics involves petroleum naphtha, a liquid hydrocarbon derived from crude oil. Like olefins, BTX aromatics can be produced from non-fossil sources, such as lignin from biomass, or by direct reduction of CO₂.233

7. Carbon black and graphite are both carbon-rich materials that are indispensable to the modern economy. Carbon black is used as a pigment and reinforcing filler in vehicle tires and has many applications in both chemical manufacturing and electronics. Graphite, perhaps most famously associated with pencils, is used in many things, including steel, batteries, and nuclear reactors. Although technically different substances, carbon black and graphite are obtained by the incomplete combustion of fossil products, namely coal. Alternatively, carbon black can be made from biochar. Non-fossil alternatives to synthetic graphite production include mining; however, graphite recycling is the most sustainable route to eliminating the need for fossil resources. Researchers have recently demonstrated that carbonaceous species, similar to solid coal, can be obtained by catalytically reducing CO₂.234 Scaling such a process could potentially eliminate our dependence on fossil resources for obtaining carbon-rich materials.

8. Sulfur is the principal precursor to sulfuric acid, a key substance for making fertilizer, pharmaceuticals, and various other chemicals. Over 180 million tonnes of sulfuric acid are produced every year; it is such an important chemical that the amount of sulfuric acid consumed by a country is considered a strong indicator of its industrial strength. While sulfur can be mined from natural sources, it is most commonly obtained as hydrogen sulfide from petroleum or natural gas. A non-fossil alternative, other than mining directly from the earth, would be to draw from biological waste sources of hydrogen sulfide, such as manure, wastewater, and biomass, coupled with the use of renewable energy.

9. Silicon is a critical material to modern industry. Though most commonly known for its use in semiconductor electronics, silicon in various forms is also of great importance to the metallurgical and chemicals industries. Silicon exists in abundance in the earth’s crust, but the high-purity silicon required by industry is obtained by heating silica (the principal constituent of sand) in the presence of coke, a product of oil or coal. Finding a way to produce industrial-grade silicon at lower temperatures without the need for a fossil-derived source of carbon could have significant impact on reducing the emissions associated with modern electronics. New research is proving that low-temperature silicon production is indeed possible. A recent study, for example, demonstrated a method to synthesize silicon nanowires in bulk quantities, using electrochemistry to reduce a calcium silicate mineral.235 Alternatively, replacing fossil-derived coke with carbon-rich materials made from biomass or CO₂, and adopting renewable energy to drive the reduction of silica, could also eliminate the use of fossil resources in silicon production.

10. Recycling, though it does not parallel the rest of the items in this list, cannot go without a mention. Throughout this discussion we have emphasized the need to replace fossil-based processes with more sustainable, low-carbon alternatives that rely on renewable energy, biomass, and CO₂. However, we should point out that, wherever possible, repurposing, recycling, and reducing consumption of chemicals and materials – instead of producing them from scratch – offers major energy and emissions savings to our current manufacturing economy. In the analogy of our chemical tree, recycling translates to the reducing of the quantity of raw natural resources and root chemicals and materials that are needed to generate consumer goods. Key areas where recycling could have a real impact on emissions savings include the manufacturing of steel, plastics, paper, and lithium-ion batteries. Here, there are many opportunities for chemistry and engineering research to fill the gaps. For example, the creation of easily removable dyes can facilitate paper recycling, and alloy-separation technologies for scrap-metal recycling can eliminate the need to expand mining operations. Ultimately, reducing consumption – at both the individual and the industrial level – must lie at the heart of the low-carbon economy of the future.

The current chemical tree is not an innate structure. Like most human structures, it has been shaped by centuries of political, economic, technological, and social forces and therefore can and should be transformed to adapt to the needs of the present day. Indeed, it has already happened many times before. Between the two world wars the United States revised its entire chemical industry to protect its economy in anticipation of possible import contingencies. Ironically it was exactly during this time that it built up its chemical manufacturing around petroleum, natural gas, and agricultural by-products. With our current understanding of fundamental science and the expanse of engineering tools at our disposal, we cannot afford to limit our imaginations when it comes to what the chemical tree of the future might look like.

The Future Is Bright

The future of carbon-negative technologies is certainly bright. Economic indicators of the potential effects of climate change have drawn the attention of investors and financial regulators to the effect of carbon-emission controls on the stranded assets of fossil-fuel companies and to the impact of climate change on stock asset values. Over the past few years there has already been over a 10 percent increase in worldwide sales of clean technology. Estimates of global investments in innovative clean technology and enhanced resource efficiency amount to USD 2.9 trillion. This pales in comparison to the anticipated USD 90 trillion investments in low- carbon solutions for renewed urban, land, and energy infrastructure. It therefore comes as no surprise that “liquid fuels from sunshine,” the aforementioned process in which sunlight-activated synthetic catalysts convert water and carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons, has been selected by the World Economic Forum’s Expert Network and Global Future Councils in collaboration with Scientific American and its board of advisers as one of the top ten emerging technologies with the “potential to improve lives, transform industries, and safeguard the planet.”236

In 2015, global aggregate investment in the renewable energy industry surpassed that in fossil fuels for the first time. It seems that the envisioned transition in our energy system, from non-renewable to renewable, is inevitable. Still, the challenge remains of meeting our emission targets quickly enough to avoid irreversible temperature rise. As put by the 2018 report of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, “the next 10–15 years are a unique ‘use it or lose it’ moment in economic history.”15 On this note, we should point out that adaption will become an increasingly critical part of a strategy going forward. This involves planning and preparing communities for the economic and environmental changes that lie ahead. Even if global temperature rise were to be successfully limited to 1.5°C, we are already seeing that it is necessary to adapt to the effects of the mere 1°C increase we are currently experiencing. Extreme-weather preparedness will be particularly critical to the preservation of human life in both the short and the long term.

We are nevertheless beginning to see encouraging signs of change on the horizon. The global energy revolution has begun, with clean-technology solutions increasingly contributing to our daily lives. These solutions are exemplified by energy-efficient lighting, electric cars, solar and wind electricity generation, large-scale battery storage, hydrogen fuel cell buses, smart energy-saving windows, solar thermal heating systems, green cement, and self-cleaning buildings. Furthermore, CO₂-utilization technologies are becoming more than just a musing of academic research papers. Appendix A provides a long, though not complete, list of companies around the world that are already making fuels, chemicals, and consumer products out of CO₂. We encourage you to learn and support these creative and important endeavors; indeed, they are leading our energy revolution and paving the way toward a zero-emission economy.

We have also compiled a list of ten actions you can take to lessen the impact of climate change:

1. Educate those around you about the need for action on climate and the vision of an industrial and energy infrastructure that operates with net-zero emissions. One does not need to be an authority on climate science or policy to communicate the urgent need for climate action; simply talking about it sends a message of seriousness that is effective in itself. Moreover, we must not underestimate our individual influence within our networks and communities. The success of renewable energy technologies and recycling initiatives are largely thanks to widespread public knowledge of them. Help spread the message!

2. Vote in favor of climate-change mitigation. This is arguably the most important step that a citizen can take. Government commitment to achieving national and regional emission targets, as well as leading and participating in the international climate-change conversation, is critical to ensuring effective mitigation and adaptation strategies.

3. Write to your elected representatives, urging them to support and commit to emission-reduction strategies in your community. These can include investing in public transportation infrastructure, implementing pollution pricing schemes, and creating policy to support and sustain an energy landscape based on 100 percent renewable sources and carbon-negative technologies.

4. Read more about the carbon footprint associated with various products and activities. Did you know, for example, that bananas are one of the most carbon-friendly foods?55 Keeping informed of the impact of our daily lives on our planet is key to the individual decision-making that can eventually lead to widespread changes in consumer attitudes. A list of recommended reading material is provided in appendix B.

5. Invest in carbon-neutral and carbon-negative technologies (if it is financially feasible for you, of course). Many companies based on renewable-energy and carbon-negative technologies have appeared on the scene in recent years, and supporting their entry to market is key to ensuring their success. A list of existing companies is provided in appendix A. If you want the diversity of broad indexes such as the S&P 500, fossil-free variants are available as exchange-traded funds.

6. Eat less red meat.* You do not need to become vegan to have an impact on the planet. Reducing meat consumption alone is one of the highest-impact actions that individuals can take to reduce their carbon footprint.237 The recovery of pasture lands for natural vegetation would significantly increase carbon uptake from the atmosphere, as well as reduce the methane and nitrous oxide emissions that result directly from cattle. It goes without saying that shifting toward a plant-based diet could have far-reaching benefits to the environment and the climate. Also important is the need to reduce our food waste. It is estimated that one-fifth of all the food produced in Canada annually ends up in a landfill, or alongside organic waste – that is, food that could have otherwise been eaten.238 Although the waste occurs at various points along the food supply chain, individual households can have a real impact on reducing food waste. If you are not convinced, consider that being mindful about planning your grocery needs, freezing food, and saving leftovers is also good for your wallet.

7. Travel consciously. Walking, cycling, and public transit are ideal choices for commuters when it comes to their carbon footprint. As these options are not necessarily available or viable for those living in rural areas, this is an even better reason their lobby government to invest in public transportation infrastructure!

If a motor vehicle is necessary to your lifestyle, switching to a more energy-efficient engine and choosing to carpool are effective strategies for reducing your carbon footprint. Purchasing a hybrid or electric vehicle is another excellent option if battery-charging infrastructure is available in your region. As renewable energy infrastructure is further developed, and charging stations that provide 100 percent renewably sourced electricity are established, we can expect that electric vehicles will become an increasingly important technology in reducing emissions. Finally, “flight shaming” (and any kind of shaming, for that matter) will not solve our climate crisis. We must recognize that it will take time for procurement structures to change.

8. Assess energy consumption in your home. According to one environmental assessment study, commodities and energy use associated with households are connected to supply chains that are responsible for up to 60 percent of GHG emissions worldwide.239 Although a household’s transportation habits were the greatest determinant of their carbon footprint (see point 7), consumption associated with shelter, such as the burning of household fuel, was the second-largest source of direct emissions. Reductions in GHG emissions from building retrofits can be achieved faster and tend to be more cost-effective compared to other climate-mitigation measures. Dr. Christina Hoicka of York University and Dr. Runa Das of Royal Roads University argue that retrofitting buildings with the goal of maximizing social and environmental benefits is an underestimated strategy that can help meet emission targets in the short term.240 So, be mindful of your lighting and thermostat habits and check to ensure that all your home appliances are running efficiently. If possible, seek a third-party energy assessment of your household to help identify ways in which you can improve the energy efficiency of your home.

9. Reduce consumption wherever possible. Changing consumer behavior is a critical factor in ensuring sustainable management of our resources in the long term. This is becoming increasingly important as the fastest-growing populations strive for a Western standard of living that is characteristically carbon intensive. Remember that your use of a product comprises just a small fraction of the carbon emissions associated with its full life span. An innocent-seeming disposable coffee cup, though not spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as you hold it, has emissions associated with the extraction of raw materials, the manufacturing of polyethylene plastic used to line its interior, and the vehicle that brought it to the café, not to mention the fumes it will emit from the landfill. So, be mindful of the everyday products that you purchase and consume, and remember that individual action begets collective action.

Although little research has been carried out on the relative carbon footprint of online versus traditional shopping, some recent studies are beginning to shed light on the matter. The answer is not clear, however, and depends greatly on the method of transportation available to the consumer, as well as the frequency of the purchases.241 Although online shopping generally has a smaller carbon footprint compared to regular shopping, next-day or two-day shipping (based on a US study) may not be the same, because it adds stress to logistical systems, often forcing deliveries to be made via non-optimal transport pathways.242 The situation in other countries could be different, particularly when distances are smaller and aircraft are not used for the same-day or two-day deliveries. So, next time you are tempted by the promise of two-day shipping at no extra charge, remember that we all have a role to play in protecting our planet, and opt for the regular shipping instead.

10. Support evidence-based decision-making. Many existing networks are doing great work in lobbying government and policymakers to turn to science to help create effective climate policy. For more information, visit

• Campaign for Science and Engineering (United Kingdom), http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/

• Citizens’ Climate Lobby (Canada and United States), https://citizensclimatelobby.org/

• Evidence for Democracy (Canada), https://evidencefordemocracy.ca/

• Indigenous Environmental Network (United States and Canada), http://www.ienearth.org/

• Sunrise Movement (United States), https://www.sunrisemovement.org/

• 350.org (International), https://350.org/

• Toronto Science Policy Network (Canada), https://toscipolicynet.ca/

• Union of Concerned Scientists (United States), https://www.ucsusa.org/

Since it was first created from carbon and oxygen atoms after the big bang, carbon dioxide has been on an interesting journey, as a constituent of an atmosphere unable to support life, to its substitution by oxygen molecules that are able to sustain life. Working together in a carbon cycle, CO₂ and oxygen have allowed all life on earth to flourish, but we are beginning to realize that too much of one and too little of the other can bring a troubling end to this delicate balancing act.

We hope that throughout these pages you have become convinced that incorporating captured CO₂ into our industrial processes and technologies can provide alternative carbon-neutral solutions to our existing fossil-fuel conundrum. Change is happening, and it is hoped that the pace of the energy transition will be fast enough to keep below the tipping point of anthropogenic climate change that is stimulated by carbon dioxide. Ultimately deep systemic changes in our economic structures will be needed to ensure a sustainable and equitable future for all, and social movement coalitions must be at the forefront of these transformations.

The exciting potential that carbon dioxide capture, sequestration, and utilization technologies offer to help avoid this scenario, with gigantic rewards to the economy, environment, and climate, is our story’s central message. It is a tall order for society, but we are all in this world together, and we must all now shoulder the Herculean responsibilities of caring for the earth and our collective future with the same degree of concern that we have for ourselves.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• A process that captures and/or uses CO₂ emissions is not necessarily carbon negative or carbon neutral. The carbon footprint associated with all its energy and materials inputs and outputs must be considered to determine its net emissions.

• A life-cycle analysis is a cradle-to-grave evaluation of the energy, economic, and environmental impact of a technology or process.

• To be successful, new technologies should be scalable, economically viable, socially responsible, and environmentally benign.

• The vision of a global CO₂-utilization strategy can be realized with generous investment in research, accelerated market development, and radical policy reform.

• There is consensus that CO₂ utilization can be commercially viable with short turnaround times for investment returns.

• Effective and transparent communication is crucial to gaining public trust and support for CO₂ capture, storage, and utilization technologies.

• Knowledge dissemination through technological demonstrations and pilot operations can help educate non-experts on the emission-free alternatives to fossil-based processes.

• Large-scale deployment of CO₂ capture, storage, and utilization technologies is contingent on geographic location, available infrastructure, accessibility to renewable energy, local market, and competition posed by fossil-based technologies.

• Rethinking our energy and industrial infrastructure provides an opportunity to challenge conventional models of resource production and distribution.

• Adaption, in the form of planning and preparing communities for economic and environmental changes, will become an increasingly critical part of climate action strategies going forward.

__________________

* This is a general guideline that should only be considered by individuals whose financial and environmental circumstances guarantee their access to nutritious food. Furthermore, an individual’s dietary choices should not be subject to any rules or restrictions that pose a risk to their physical and/or mental well-being.