Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets: All 6 Pros and 6 Cons Explained

Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets: All 6 Pros and 6 Cons Explained

By
Grace Smoot

Read Time:23 Minutes

CLICK TO
SUBSCRIBE

follow follow
Impactful Ninja is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more Learn more .
Affiliate Disclosure

Hey fellow impactful ninja ?

You may have noticed that Impactful Ninja is all about providing helpful information to make a positive impact on the world and society. And that we love to link back to where we found all the information for each of our posts.

  • Most of these links are informational-based for you to check out their primary sources with one click.

  • But some of these links are so-called "affiliate links" to products that we recommend.

Why do we add these product links?

First and foremost, because we believe that they add value to you. For example, when we wrote a post about the environmental impact of long showers, we came across an EPA recommendation to use WaterSense showerheads. So we linked to where you can find them. Or, for many of our posts, we also link to our favorite books on that topic so that you can get a much more holistic overview than one single blog post could provide.

And when there is an affiliate program for these products, we sign up for it. For example, as Amazon Associates, we earn from qualifying purchases.

What do these affiliate links mean for you?
  1. First, and most importantly, we still only recommend products that we believe add value for you.

  2. When you buy something through one of our affiliate links, we may earn a small commission - but at no additional costs to you.

  3. And when you buy something through a link that is not an affiliate link, we won’t receive any commission but we’ll still be happy to have helped you.

What do these affiliate links mean for us?
  1. When we find products that we believe add value to you and the seller has an affiliate program, we sign up for it.

  2. When you buy something through one of our affiliate links, we may earn a small commission (at no extra costs to you).

  3. And at this point in time, all money is reinvested in sharing the most helpful content with you. This includes all operating costs for running this site and the content creation itself.

What does this mean for me personally?

You may have noticed by the way Impactful Ninja is operated that money is not the driving factor behind it. It is a passion project of mine and I love to share helpful information with you to make a positive impact on the world and society. However, it's a project in that I invest a lot of time and also quite some money.

Eventually, my dream is to one day turn this passion project into my full-time job and provide even more helpful information. But that's still a long time to go.

Stay impactful,

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a process that captures carbon dioxide (CO2) for the purpose of long-term storage in our carbon sinks (e.g., forests, oceans, underground). The pros and cons vary based on the specific type of capture and storage. So, we had to ask: What are the pros and cons of carbon capture and storage offsets?

Carbon capture and storage offsets can have varying levels of permanence and cost-effectiveness, depending on the specific project. They reinforce our carbon sinks and can have low levels of carbon re-emission; however, they also may not yet be scaled to compensate for our global emissions.

Keep reading to find out all about what the pros and cons of carbon capture and storage offsets are, how you can offset your carbon footprint with them, how they can mitigate climate change, and what better alternatives to CCS offsets are. 

Here’s What All the Best Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Have in Common

Carbon offsets are reductions in carbon emissions that are used to compensate for carbon emissions occurring elsewhere. They are measured in tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents and are bought and sold through international brokers, online retailers, and trading platforms on what is known as the global carbon offset market. 

Carbon Offset: a way for a company or person to reduce the level of carbon dioxide for which they are responsible by paying money to a company that works to reduce the total amount produced in the world, for example by reforestation”

Oxford Dictionary

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the combination of two processes, CO2 capture and long-term CO2 storage in various reservoirs to minimize its effect on the atmosphere.

Carbon Capture and Storage: the process of trapping carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels or other chemical or biological processes and storing it in such a way that it is unable to affect the atmosphere, with the aim of mitigating the effects of global warming.” 

Oxford Languages

CCS can occur via two main methods:

  • Artificial methods: The result of carbon capture. The captured carbon is compressed into a liquid and transported via pipeline, ship, or tanker before being pumped deep underground, often at depths of 1 kilometer (0.6 miles), and sequestered in depleted oil reserves, coalbeds, or saline aquifers. 

Carbon Sink: a forest, ocean, or other natural environment viewed in terms of its ability to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Oxford Dictionary 

CCS is also commonly referred to as carbon sequestration because carbon sequestration is the next step after CO2 has been captured.

Some of the most common CCS offset projects include:

Related: Are you interested in learning more about the big picture of carbon capture and storage offsets? Check it out in this article here: “What Are Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets and How Do They Work? The Big Picture
6 Pros of Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets6 Cons of Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets
Carbon capture and storage offsets can be permanentCarbon capture and storage offsets can lack permanence
Carbon capture and storage offsets can reduce CO2 emissions quicklyCarbon capture and storage offsets can be relatively expensive 
Carbon capture and storage offsets can be cost-effectiveCarbon capture and storage offsets may not yet be scaled to compensate for our global emissions
Carbon capture and storage offsets can reinforce our carbon sinksCarbon capture and storage offsets can negatively alter ecosystems
Carbon capture and storage offsets can have low rates of carbon re-emissionCarbon capture and storage offsets can be difficult to standardize, verify, and monitor
Carbon capture and storage offsets allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individuallyCarbon capture and storage offsets do not reduce your own carbon emissions

What Are 6 Pros of Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets can be permanent, immediate, cost-effective, have low rates of carbon re-emission, and reinforce our carbon sinks, depending on the specific type of offset. They also allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

Pro #1: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Be Permanent

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets such as direct carbon/air capture (DCC/DAC), carbon mineralization, and biochar agricultural offsets can permanently remove carbon from the atmosphere.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #1

DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization offsets are specific types of offsets that remove carbon from the atmosphere and store it permanently in various reservoirs. 

For example, Climeworks’ technology pulls CO2 from the air whilst their partner, Carbfix, turns captured CO2 into stone by dissolving it in water and injecting it underground where it reacts with basalt rock to form solid minerals. The process locks away CO2 for thousands of years with no long-term monitoring required.

Additionally, experts estimate that biochar tilled into soils and not disturbed can store CO2 for centuries to millennia, making it a long-term carbon sequestration solution. Also, biochar that has been incorporated into soils is 10-100 times more stable than the biomass it was derived from, leading to less carbon leakage and a slower overall rate of CO2 degradation. As long as the lands are not developed, the sequestered carbon can remain stored underground.

When comparing it to other methods of carbon removal, we find that DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, and some agricultural offsets reduce CO2 emissions more permanently. 

In short, CCS offsets such as DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization offsets permanently remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Storing the carbon underground in rock formations is also a permanent process. 

Pro #2: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Reduce CO2 Emissions Quickly

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets such as DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, REDD+, and some blue carbon and agricultural offsets reduce emissions quicker than other nature-based solutions.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #2
  • CO2 emissions reductions from DCC/DAC offsets occur as soon as the machines become operational. Once the carbon capture machines start sucking in atmospheric air, CO2 removal begins. 
  • REDD+ projects reduce emissions immediately because you are protecting existing vegetation rather than creating new vegetation. 
  • For blue carbon, protecting existing seagrass beds and tidal marsh areas reduces CO2 immediately.

In short, CCS offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, REDD+, and some blue carbon and agricultural offsets reduce emissions quicker than other nature-based solutions. 

Pro #3: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Be Cost-Effective

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agriculture are some of the most cost-effective methods of carbon emission reduction.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #3

In general, combating deforestation is an expensive process. But coupling reforestation, afforestation, and blue carbon projects with carbon offsets could help finance this process Especially since these offsets are typically more cost-effective than other categories of offsets. 

In short, CCS offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agriculture are relatively cost-effective when compared to other methods of carbon emission reduction.

Pro #4: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Reinforce Our Carbon Sinks

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agroforestry reinforce our terrestrial and marine carbon sinks.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #4

Nature-based solutions such as reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and some agricultural offsets store carbon in vegetation (forests), soils, and oceans, which are commonly referred to as our carbon sinks

Carbon Sink: an area of forest that is large enough to absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide from the earth’s atmosphere and therefore to reduce the effect of global warming

Cambridge Dictionary 

Carbon capture and storage offsets such as reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, and agroforestry agricultural carbon offsets take advantage of trees’ ability to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and store it in their leaves, trunks, roots, and surrounding soil. 

Our forests absorbed over 15.6 billion tons (bt) of CO2 each year from 2001-2019, compared to the approximately 8.1 bt of CO2 released via deforestation, fires, and other disturbances. Still, this means that globally, forests act as a carbon sink capable of absorbing a net 7.6 bt of CO2 per year.

Blue carbon offsets take advantage of mangroves, seagrasses, and salt marshes’ abilities to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and store it in their vegetation and surrounding soil.

Mangroves and salt marshes can absorb 3-5x more carbon per acre (ac) than tropical forests at a rate 10 times greater, and seagrass meadows store 11% of the ocean’s buried carbon. But the real carbon storage potential is underground, with 50–99% of the carbon stored in blue ecosystems located in the soil underground

In short, CCS offsets such as reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agroforestry offsets reinforce our terrestrial and marine carbon sinks, which can absorb billions of tons of CO2 annually. 

Pro #5: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Have Low Rates of Carbon Re-Emission

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, and biochar have a low rate of carbon re-emission, making them effective at removing carbon.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #5

Although DCC/DAC facilities require energy to operate, they can re-emit only small amounts of CO2 if powered by low-carbon energy sources (i.e., solar or wind power). For example, a study published by the RWTH Aachen University on Climeworks’ Orca DCC plant found that this plant re-emits less than 10% of the CO2 they capture when the plant is operated by low-carbon electricity. 

Also, greenSand Olivine rocks permanently store carbon and will only release that carbon back into the atmosphere if the temperature exceeds 1,600 degrees. Even if the rocks are broken, the carbon will remain trapped inside and will not be re-emitted.

Lastly, experts estimate that biochar tilled into soils and not disturbed can store CO2 for centuries to millennia. As long as the lands are not developed, the sequestered carbon can remain stored underground. And biochar that has been incorporated into soils is 10-100 times more stable than the biomass it was derived from, leading to less carbon leakage and a slower overall rate of CO2 degradation

In short, CCS offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, and biochar can have low rates of carbon re-emission.

Pro #6: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Help Offset Carbon Emissions That Can’t Be Reduced Otherwise

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Pro #6

We already have governmental-level policies in place to reduce carbon emissions, but carbon offsets allow us to reduce emissions from activities where sustainable alternatives are not yet widely available. 

Carbon offsets are designed for situations where emissions are impossible to reduce because you can use those funds to reduce emissions in other areas. For example, we can only do so much to reduce our individual carbon footprints. Using public transportation, washing with cold water, and switching from single-use to sustainable products lowers our carbon footprint, but it does not eliminate them completely. This is where CCS offsets come into play to compensate for the remainder of our carbon emissions.

In short, CCS offsets allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

What Are 6 Cons of Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets can lack permanence, can be relatively expensive, may not be scaled to compensate for our global emissions, can negatively alter ecosystems, and can be difficult to monitor and verify, depending on the specific type of offset. They also do not reduce your own carbon emissions, which can lead to greenwashing.

Con #1: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Lack Permanence 

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agroforestry can lack permanence because they are reversible, nature-based solutions.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #1

To be effective, CCS offset projects must be permanent, in the sense that there must be a full guarantee against reversals of carbon emission for the foreseeable future. 

Nature-based solutions, such as reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agroforestry can lack permanence because the storage of carbon is reversible

For reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, and afforestation offsets, the carbon is stored in biomass (trees) rather than in permanent reservoirs (i.e., underground in rock formations). Once a tree is planted, it should never be removed in order to guarantee permanence. But trees die naturally, and environmental disasters such as floods, fires, changes in land use, and climate change itself can negate any permanence

Blue carbon ecosystems have a leg up on terrestrial ecosystems in terms of permanence because blue carbon sinks are less susceptible to wildfires, mangroves are more durable than terrestrial forests, and coastal trees have less of a concern for leakage because they are not typically used for lumber.

However, blue carbon ecosystems are currently being degraded at 4 times the rate of tropical forests. Climate change and ocean acidification are some of the leading factors that can negate blue carbon permanence because coastal ecosystems are especially sensitive to sea level rise, storm intensity, and rising ocean temperatures, all of which have been occurring at an accelerated rate. 

In short, CCS offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, blue carbon, and agroforestry can lack permanence because they are reversible, nature-based solutions.

Con #2: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Be Relatively Expensive

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets such as DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization offsets are some of the most expensive methods of carbon removal.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #2

DCC/DAC offsets currency range anywhere from $250-$1200 per ton, the highest out of all carbon removal methods. Close behind are carbon mineralization offsets, which currently range anywhere from $82$1,200 per ton of CO2. Both are dependent on the type of technology, the type of energy source, and the scale of the operation.

In comparison, reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, and blue carbon offsets can cost less than $50 per ton

DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization offsets are so expensive because there are still relatively few companies and projects in operation. As more companies and projects are developed, costs could drop over the next decade

In short, CCS offsets such as DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization are some of the more expensive methods of carbon removal. With further research, development, and funding, this could decrease in the coming years. 

Con #3: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets May Not Yet Be Scaled to Compensate for Our Global Emissions

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, blue carbon, and agriculture are not yet at a scale where they can compensate for our global carbon emissions.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #3

Currently, carbon offsets in general are not sufficient to compensate for all of our carbon emissions. We emit more than 36 billion tons of carbon annually, but carbon offset credits for only ~1 billion tons of CO2 have been listed for sale on the voluntary market. The number of sellers also exceeds the number of buyers by about 600-700 million tons. This means that only about 0.8-1% of our annual CO2 emissions are offset and only about 1.6-1.75% could be offset if all of these projects got realized.

Currently, DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, blue carbon, and agricultural offsets are also not scaled enough to keep pace with our global carbon emissions. 

There are relatively few companies engaged in DCC/DAC practices and the technology is still expensive to implement; therefore, the amount of carbon it can remove is limited. But the recent push for more DCC/DAC technology means that its capacity is increasing. Climeworks began construction in 2022 for its newest plant, Mammoth, which will have an annual carbon capture capacity of 36,000 tons, nine times that of its current plant Orca.

There are also relatively few companies engaged in carbon mineralization on a commercial level, and processes, standards, and technologies still need to be developed to ensure proper monitoring, verification, and reporting of carbon sequestration via mineralization. Experts estimate that carbon mineralization could be scaled up to capture 2-4 billion tons of CO2 per year by 2050

Although blue carbon ecosystems are capable of providing 1/3 of the total emissions reductions needed to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius, they only receive 3% of total climate investments globally. As more blue carbon methodologies are established, experts expect monetization of coastal wetland conservation and restoration activities to increase

Experts also predict the world’s population will increase by 2 billion people in the next 30 years. More people means more mouths to feed; therefore, agriculture production and subsequent GHG emissions from agriculture will continue to increase. We already emit approximately 570 million tons of CH4, a significant amount of which comes from agriculture. 

In short, CCS offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, blue carbon, and agriculture are not yet scaled to keep pace with our global carbon emissions due to various barriers. 

Con #4: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Negatively Alter Ecosystems

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets such as afforestation and carbon mineralization can negatively alter ecosystems if not planned properly.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #4

Afforestation increases global tree coverage; however, we have to be careful of where we plant trees because not all ecosystems are conducive to afforestation, and because afforestation can have a high land use change opportunity cost.

For example, afforestation on grasslands can actually reduce the amount of water in streams and rivers, the frequency of fires, and biodiversity. And if not planned properly, afforestation projects can introduce invasive species. For example, Asian long-horn beetle infestations wiped out large swaths of trees in China’s Great Green Wall program of 1978, which sought to reforest 35 million hectares of land.

Carbon mineralization can come with risks including the contamination of surface and groundwater and the induction of seismic activity. But proper monitoring and siting procedures can help mitigate these risks.

For example, Carbfix injects CO2-dissolved water, which is denser than pure water and sinks below it, to avoid interacting with the groundwater table. At the surface, there are also negligible effects from injected CO2. In addition, Carbfix conducts independent seismic risk assessments and monitors injection sites before and during well-drilling activities.

In short, CCS offsets such as afforestation and carbon mineralization offsets can negatively alter ecosystems if projects are not planned properly.

Con #5: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Can Be Difficult to Monitor and Verify

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets involving blue carbon and agriculture can be difficult to standardize, verify, and monitor.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #5

The storage of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems is well documented and managed via the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism; however, there is no overarching mechanism to regulate the carbon stored in coastal, marine, or wetland soils and biomass.

Leading standards all have different methodologies for assessing blue carbon: 

Similarly, agricultural emissions themselves are difficult to measure and manage because there are hundreds of millions of farmers around the world, most of which are farming small plots of land. In order to exact change on a global scale, we would have to incorporate agricultural offset practices such as biochar, agroforestry, and methane capture on a massive scale and for hundreds of years into the future. This would be difficult to do both socially and economically.

For example, Verra, the American Carbon Registry, and the Gold Standard all have different methodologies for biochar and biochar projects. There are also different governing organizations for biochar, including The European Biochar Certificate (EBC), The US Biochar Initiative, and The International Biochar Initiative.

In short, CCS offsets involving blue carbon and agriculture can be difficult to standardize, verify, and monitor because there are multiple methodologies and governing companies.

Con #6: Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Do Not Reduce Your Own Carbon Emissions

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets do not reduce your own carbon emissions, which can lead to greenwashing.

Carbon Capture and Storage Offset Con #6

One of the main limitations of carbon offsetting, in general, is that purchasing a carbon offset does not directly reduce your carbon footprint. It only makes others reduce their carbon footprint to compensate for your carbon footprint. 

If emissions are only offset and not reduced from the source, this could lead to greenwashing, when the consumer is deceived into thinking they are offsetting their emissions but in reality, they are not. Companies accused of greenwashing either invest in non-verified credits, do not prioritize in-house emissions reductions, or double-count carbon credits. Or sometimes, all of the above.

In short, because CCS offsets do not reduce your own emissions, they could lead to greenwashing.

How Could You Offset Your Own Carbon Footprint With Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets

The market for carbon offsets was small in the year 2000, but by 2010 it had already grown to represent nearly $10 billion worldwide. The voluntary carbon offset market (VCM) is where everyday consumers can purchase carbon offsets to offset their carbon emissions. 

The Ecosystem Marketplace predicts the VCM can grow to $50B by the year 2050. And because CCS offsets can be effective and efficient at reducing carbon emissions, they are predicted to make up an increasingly larger share of this market.

Related: Are you interested in learning more about the best carbon capture and storage offsets? Check out the full article here: “Best Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets
Carbon Capture and Storage Offset CompanyQuick Facts
ClimeworksAbout: Carbon offset purchases support the practice of direct CO2 removal, where specialized machines remove CO2 directly from the air and store it in rock formations underground.
Costs: $1.20 per 1kg of CO2
The Arbor Day FoundationAbout: Carbon offset purchases support afforestation (and reforestation) projects in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (US), Nicaragua, and Peru.
Costs: $40 per 1,000kg of CO2
REDD.plusAbout: Carbon offset purchases support UNFCCC-verified REDD+ projects around the globe. REDD.plus is a central registry and exchange for REDD+ Result Units, a type of carbon credit. 
Costs: $16 per ton of CO2 
SeaTreesAbout: Carbon offset purchases support coral reef/kelp forest/watershed restoration as well as mangrove tree planting.
Costs: $22 per 1,000kg of CO2
HuskAbout: Husk converts rice husks into biochar, fertilizers, and biopesticides via smokeless pyrolysis, preventing the re-emission of carbon into the atmosphere. 
Costs: Husk uses resellers to sell its solutions. Visit Patch’s website to learn more about pricing. 
NovocarboAbout: Novocarbo uses pyrogenic carbon capture and storage, which converts CO2 into regenerative energy and biochar. The biochar can be used as soil, as a replacement for cement, and in regenerative agriculture.
Costs: Novocarbo uses resellers (e.g., Puro.earth and Carbonfuture), costs are determined with these.
EcologiAbout: Carbon offset purchases support third-party certified reforestation/afforestation carbon offset projects including those in Madagascar, Mozambique, Bolivia, Morocco, Senegal, and Uruguay.
Costs: $6.04 per 1,000 kg of CO2 offset
One Tree PlantedAbout: Carbon offset purchases support reforestation/afforestation projects including those in the US, Romania, Iceland, and Africa.
Costs: $20 per 1,000kg of CO2
The Ocean FoundationAbout: Carbon offset purchases support the SeaGrass Grow, seagrass planting project.
Costs: $20 per 1,000kg of CO2
Wildlife WorksAbout: Carbon offset purchases support third-party certified carbon offset projects including The Kasigau Corridor, Mai Ndombe, and Southern Cardamom REDD+ projects in Kenya, Cambodia, and Colombia respectively.
Costs: $20 per ton of CO2
NeustarkAbout: Neustark removes CO2 from the atmosphere and stores it in recycled concrete, and they cut new CO2 emissions by reducing the use of traditional cement.
Costs: Costs are determined after initial contact.
greenSandAbout: greenSand uses Olivine rocks, which trap CO2 when they come into contact with water. For every ton of CO2 purchased, greenSand spreads 1 ton of Olivine, which can in turn absorb and permanently store 1 ton of CO2.
Costs: $82 per 1,000kg of CO2
Vi AgroforestryAbout: Vi Agroforestry specializes in poverty reduction and environmental improvement through agroforestry and improved farming practices. 
Costs: $28 per 1,000kg of CO2 offset
TerrapassAbout: Carbon offset purchases support the reforestation, afforestation, and REDD+ projects in Peru, Canada, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and the US.
Costs: $16.51-$17.63 per 1,000kg of CO2

How Can Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Help Mitigate Climate Change

Climate change is a severe and long-term consequence of fossil fuel combustion. Carbon capture and storage offsets can help mitigate climate change because they eliminate fossil-fuel-derived carbon from our atmosphere which, if left untreated, can remain there for tens of thousands of years and exacerbate the negative effects of climate change.

How is Climate Change Defined

Climate change is arguably the most severe, long-term global impact of fossil fuel combustion. Every year, approximately 33 billion tons (bt) of CO2 are emitted from burning fossil fuels. The carbon found in fossil fuels reacts with oxygen in the air to produce CO2

Climate change: changes in the earth’s weather, including changes in temperature, wind patterns and rainfall, especially the increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere that is caused by the increase of particular gasses, especially carbon dioxide.

Oxford Dictionary

Atmospheric CO2 fuels climate change, which results in global warming. When CO2 and other air pollutants absorb sunlight and solar radiation in the atmosphere, it traps the heat and acts as an insulator for the planet. Since the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s temperature has risen a little more than 1 degree Celsius (C), or 2 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Between 1880-1980 the global temperature rose by 0.07C every 10 years. This rate has more than doubled since 1981, with a current global annual temperature rise of 0.18C, or 0.32F, for every 10 years. 

As outlined in the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, we must cut current GHG emissions by 50% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050

How Do Carbon Offsets Generally Help Mitigate Climate Change

Levels of carbon in our atmosphere that cause climate change have increased due to human emissions since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in 1750. The global average concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today registers at over 400 parts per million. Carbon offsets can help prevent these levels from increasing even more.

When you hear the words “carbon offset”, think about the term “compensation”. Essentially, carbon offsets are reductions in GHG emissions that are used to compensate for emissions occurring elsewhere

Carbon offsets that meet key criteria and verified project standards, are additional and permanent, and are a part of projects that are carried out until the end of their lifespan have the best chance of reducing carbon emissions and therefore reducing climate change. 

When we offset CO2 we also slow the rate of global temperature rise, which in turn minimizes the effects of climate change. 

How Do Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets Specifically Help Mitigate Climate Change

Carbon capture and storage in general can specifically help mitigate climate change because it eliminates atmospheric carbon, which when emitted, can remain in our atmosphere for a long period of time

Reforestation, afforestation, and REDD+ offsets specifically help mitigate climate change because they plant more trees, and trees remove CO2 from the air as they grow. By increasing the number of trees on our planet, we increase the amount of carbon they are capable of storing. The more carbon our forests can absorb, the less carbon there is in our atmosphere. 

Blue carbon offsets specifically help mitigate climate change because they protect coastal and marine ecosystems, which are capable of absorbing more CO2 per acre than rainforests and at a rate 10x greater. 

Direct carbon/air capture and carbon mineralization offsets specifically help mitigate climate change because these methods permanently lock away CO2 for thousands of years with little to no re-emission.

Agricultural carbon offsets such as biochar, agroforestry, avoided grassland conversion, and CH4 capture can specifically help mitigate climate change because they reduce CO2 and CH4 emissions in one of the biggest industries worldwide.

What Are Better Alternatives to Carbon Capture and Storage Offsets

If used correctly, CCS offsets can provide environmental, economic, and social benefits beyond reducing carbon emissions. They have the potential to instigate meaningful environmental change and begin to reverse some of the effects of climate change. 

However, we can’t let this method be a guilt-free way to reduce carbon emissions. Carbon capture and storage offsets must be used in conjunction with direct carbon reduction measures to reduce carbon emissions in the long term. 

These reduction measures don’t have to involve drastic changes either. Actions that may seem small can have a big impact because those small changes add up! You can reduce your carbon footprint in three main areas of your life: household, travel, and lifestyle. 

Reduce your household carbon footprint:

Reduce your travel carbon footprint:

  • Walk or bike when possible: The most efficient ways of traveling are walking, bicycling, or taking the train. Using a bike instead of a car can reduce carbon emissions by 75%. These forms of transportation also provide lower levels of air pollution.

Reduce your lifestyle carbon footprint:

  • Switch to renewable energy sources: The six most common types of renewable energy are solar, wind, hydro, tidal, geothermal, and biomass energy. They are a substitute for fossil fuels that can reduce the effects of global warming by limiting global carbon emissions and other pollutants.
  • Recycle: Recycling uses less energy and deposits less waste in landfills. Less manufacturing and transportation energy costs means fewer carbon emissions generated. Less waste in landfills means less CH4 is generated.
  • Eat less meat and dairy: Meat and dairy account for 14.5% of global GHG emissions, with beef and lamb being the most carbon-intensive. Globally, we consume much more meat than is considered sustainable, and switching to a vegan or vegetarian diet could reduce emissions. 
  • Take shorter showers: Approximately 1.2 trillion gallons of water are used each year in the United States just for showering purposes, and showering takes up about 17% of residential water usage. The amount of water consumed and the energy cost of that consumption are directly related. The less water we use the less energy we use. And the less energy we use, the less of a negative impact we have on the environment.

Because CCS offsets are an indirect and not a direct way of reducing emissions, they alone will not be enough to reduce global carbon emissions significantly. Direct measures of emission reduction, such as reducing individual energy use and consumption, are better alternatives to CCS offsets. 

Related: Are you interested in learning why reducing your carbon footprint is so important? Check it out in this article here: “4 Main Reasons Why Reducing Your Carbon Footprint Is Important

Final Thoughts

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) offsets can be permanent, immediate, cost-effective, have low rates of carbon re-emission, and reinforce our carbon sinks depending on the specific type of offset. However, they can also lack permanence, can be relatively expensive, may not be scaled to compensate for our global emissions, and can negatively alter ecosystems, depending on the specific type of offset. 

Although they allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually, they also do not reduce our own carbon emissions, which can lead to greenwashing.

For all of the good carbon offsets can instigate, they should not be seen as the only solution to climate change. They are effective at reducing CO2 in the short term, but in the long term, they fail to reduce CO2 enough. Carbon offsetting can be much more effective when used in conjunction with direct CO2 reduction measures. We should reduce our own carbon footprint as much as possible first, and only then choose the most effective CCS offsets.

Stay impactful,

Illustration of a signature for Grace



Sources

Photo of author
Did you like this article?

Get the 5-minute newsletter that makes reading impactful news enjoyable—packed with actionable insights to make a positive impact in your daily life.

Newsletter Form - After Content

Three Related Posts

One Unrelated Post

Illustration of our Impactful Ninja logo, holding up a newsletter with a green heart
Become more impactful, one email at a time
Get the 5-minute newsletter that makes reading impactful news enjoyable—packed with actionable insights to make a positive impact in your daily life.
Illustration of our Impactful Ninja logo, which is a ninja holding a green heart and has a light-green outline here
Become more impactful, one email at a time
Get the 5-minute newsletter that makes reading impactful news enjoyable—packed with actionable insights to make a positive impact in your daily life.