A Research Strategy for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration

323 Pages·2022·14.281 MB·English

by  Committee on A Research Strategy for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration

Committee on A Research Strategy for Ocean-based
Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration
Ocean Studies Board
Division on Earth and Life Studies
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and ClimateWorks
Foundation, Contract No. 10004979. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in
this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for
the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-08761-2
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-08761-9
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26278
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022933129
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW,
Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; [phone] or [phone]; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. A Research Strategy
for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26278.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by
President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related
to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to
research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National
Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are
elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is
president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970
under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health
issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health.
Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other
activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies
also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and
increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.
nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task
by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and
recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s
deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process
and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle
the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the
National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the
participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National
Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.
nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON A RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR OCEAN-BASED
CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL AND SEQUESTRATION
Scott C. Doney, Chair, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
Holly Buck, University at Buffalo, NY
Ken Buesseler, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA
M. Debora Iglesias-Rodriguez, University of California, Santa Barbara
Kathryn Moran, University of Victoria, BC
Andreas Oschlies, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Germany
Phil Renforth, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK
Joe Roman, University of Vermont, Burlington
Gaurav N. Sant, University of California, Los Angeles
David A. Siegel, University of California, Santa Barbara
Romany Webb, Columbia Law School, New York, NY
Angelicque White, University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Honolulu
Staff
Kelly Oskvig, Senior Program Officer, Ocean Studies Board
Bridget McGovern, Research Associate, Ocean Studies Board
Trent Cummings, Senior Program Assistant, Ocean Studies Board, until July 2021
Elizabeth Costa, Program Assistant, Ocean Studies Board
v
OCEAN STUDIES BOARD
Larry A. Mayer (NAE), Outgoing Chair, University of New Hampshire, Durham
Claudia Benitez-Nelson, Incoming Chair, University of South Carolina, Columbia
Mark Abbott, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
Carol Arnosti, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lisa Campbell, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
Thomas S. Chance, ASV Global, LLC (ret.), Broussard, Louisiana
Daniel Costa, University of California, Santa Cruz
John Delaney, University of Washington (ret.), Seattle
Scott Glenn, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
Patrick Heimbach, University of Texas, Austin
Marcia Isakson, University of Texas, Austin
Lekelia Jenkins, Arizona State University, Tempe
Nancy Knowlton (NAS), Smithsonian Institution (ret.), Washington, District of Columbia
Anthony MacDonald, Monmouth University, West Long Branch, New Jersey
Thomas Miller, University of Maryland, Solomons
S. Bradley Moran, University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Ruth M. Perry, Shell Exploration & Production Company, Houston, Texas
James Sanchirico, University of California, Davis
Mark J. Spalding, The Ocean Foundation, Washington, District of Columbia
Richard Spinrad, Oregon State University, Corvallis
Robert S. Winokur, Michigan Tech Research Institute, Silver Spring, Maryland
OSB Staff Members
Susan Roberts, Director
Stacee Karras, Senior Program Officer
Kelly Oskvig, Senior Program Officer
Emily Twigg, Senior Program Officer
Vanessa Constant, Associate Program Officer
Megan May, Associate Program Officer
Alexandra Skrivanek, Associate Program Officer
Bridget McGovern, Research Associate
Shelly-Ann Freeland, Financial Business Partner
Thanh Nguyen, Financial Business Partner
Trent Cummings, Senior Program Assistant, until July 2021
Kenza Sidi-Ali-Cherif, Program Assistant
Grace Callahan, Program Assistant
Elizabeth Costa, Program Assistant
vi
Preface
O
ver the past several hundred years, society’s expanding consumption of fossil fuels and
extensive alteration of the terrestrial biosphere has led to a dramatic rise in atmospheric
levels of carbon dioxide (CO ) and other greenhouse gases. The resulting global climate
2
change is one of the most pressing issues facing society today. Slowing human CO emissions is
2
particularly challenging because fossil fuel use is embedded widely in our modern energy system
and economy. Thus, a broad net is being cast searching for a portfolio of solutions to decarbonize
the economy and perhaps even actively remove and safely sequester CO away from the atmosphere.
2
More than a half century ago, Revelle and Suess1 wrote a pioneering study on the ocean’s role
in removing from the atmosphere excess CO due to human emissions. Their paper was published
2
at a time when there was quite limited scientific information on the ocean carbon system. It was
published just months before the start of the iconic atmosphere CO time series by David Keeling in
2
1957 at Mauna Loa, Hawai’i, that provides one of the most robust constraints on the fate of human
CO emissions. Based on decades of subsequent ocean science and carbon cycle research, modern
2
estimates clearly indicate that natural ocean processes act to remove from the atmosphere about a
quarter of human CO emissions from fossil fuel consumption and deforestation. Thus, the ocean
2
already provides an invaluable service slowing the atmospheric growth of CO and associated cli-
2
mate change, though at the cost of rising levels of ocean acidification.
The predominant long-term fate of excess CO from human emissions is to end up in the ocean
2
over centuries to millennia. This raises the question of whether society could (and should) attempt
to accelerate ocean processes that remove and store CO away from the atmosphere. Numerous
2
approaches for deliberate ocean carbon dioxide removal (CDR), ranging across biological and
geochemical methods to more industrial techniques, have been proposed by scientists, engineers,
and technologists. As described in the body of this report, there remain crucial unresolved ques-
tions regarding many aspects of ocean CDR, and this report provides an overview of our current
state of understanding and a possible research path forward to resolve these major knowledge gaps.
1 Revelle, R., and H.E. Suess, 1957: Carbon dioxide exchange between atmosphere and ocean and the question of an in-
crease of atmospheric CO2 during the past decades, Tellus, 9(1), 18-27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x.
vii
viii PREFACE
This is a report on a research agenda to better inform future societal decisions on ocean CDR; the
Committee is not advocating either for or against possible future ocean CDR deployments, and the
Committee recognizes that ocean CDR would, at best, complement the role of climate mitigation
approaches including decarbonization.
This report builds heavily on previous National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine studies, in particular the rationale and framing for research on CDR provided in the 2015
report on Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration. The ocean
CDR report here also adds to the more terrestrial focus of the 2019 report on Negative Emissions
Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda.
The report benefited greatly from many insightful presentations given by external speakers
and the participants at the Committee’s public meetings and workshop. Because of COVID-19, the
Committee’s work was completed under the unusual conditions of virtual-only meetings, a chal-
lenge compounded by a relatively short time span for the report. I want to extend a special thanks to
the Committee members and National Academies staff for their dedication, energy, and thoughtful
discussion and contributions over the past year.
Scott Doney
Chair, Committee on A Research Strategy for
Ocean Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration
Acknowledgments
T
his Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their
diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to
provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that
it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study
charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of
the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Trisha Atwood, Utah State University, Logan
Miranda Boettcher, German Institute for International and Security Affairs, Berlin,
Germany
Philip Boyd, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
Wil Burns, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
Ken Caldeira, Carnegie Institution for Science, Washington, D.C.
Ik Kyo Chung, Pusan National University, Busan, South Korea
Sarah Cooley, Ocean Conservancy, Washington, D.C.
Matthew Eisaman, Stony Brook University, NY
Winston Ho, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Bo Barker Jørgensen, Aarhus University, Denmark
Ricardo Letelier, Oregon State University, Corvallis
Shelly D. Minteer, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Benjamin Saenz, Biota.Earth, Berkely, CA
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions,
they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see
the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Mark Barteau, Texas
ix