Bury the Lede
On the feasibility of lowering net carbon emissions by burying biomass.
“And the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw.” – Rush
As we long predicted, the 28th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was, indeed, a farce, with scores of thousands of attendees debating the semantics of a non-binding declaration. An early draft of the final communique called on countries to take actions that “could” include reducing the consumption and production of oil, coal, and gas. Howls of outrage ensued, including a quintessential rant from the pugnacious Al Gore. Changing “could” to “should” did little to stem the frenzy, but the world rejoiced when the words “transitioning away” were inserted instead. The document now calls on parties to “contribute to” the “[t]ransitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.”
That’ll show China!
As a general rule, Doomberg has stayed clear of the direct debate over whether anthropogenic carbon emissions are warming the planet and whether such a trend represents an existential threat—a debate that long ago transitioned from a scientific to a hyperpolitical one. Rather, our efforts have focused on analyzing the proposed solutions while offering alternatives of our own, on articulating the tradeoffs embedded in various energy policies, and on exposing the progressive environmental left’s move away from focusing on carbon emissions, obsessing instead over the burning of fossil fuels in the absolute, regardless of how well emissions and associated pollutants are abated.
Our relative silence on the foundational questions notwithstanding, we do occasionally come across interesting potential solutions to the carbon challenge, like this one that hit the wires last Monday (emphasis added throughout):
“The US alone could remove 1 billion tons of carbon from the atmosphere annually by midcentury using existing technologies. Forests, soil and manmade solutions in their early stages of development could help get the US to net zero, according to a report published on Monday by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory that lays out a roadmap to pull CO2 from the air.
Biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) accounts for about 70% of the US’s carbon removal potential, or approximately 700 million tons annually, said Jennifer Pett-Ridge, lead author and a senior staff scientist at the lab. BiCRS — pronounced ‘bikers’ — involves collecting municipal solid waste and forestry scraps that have pulled CO2 from the air and then using them to make products like hydrogen, biogas and charcoal.”
Having recently characterized Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) as being “home to roughly 9,000 employees, including some of the most coveted scientific minds in government,” we decided the report itself was worth a deeper look, especially in light of the comparatively paltry claimed price tag of just $130 billion. Just how much is “1 billion tons of carbon,” and how realistic is this plan? What is biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS), and can it play a meaningful role in decarbonizing our global economy? What we found might surprise you. Let’s head to the forest and inspect a few trees.