The world has far fewer places to securely store carbon dioxide deep underground than previously thought, steeply lowering its potential to help stem global warming, according to a new study that challenges long-held industry claims about the practice.

The study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, found that global carbon storage capacity was 10 times less than previous estimates after ruling out geological formations where the gas could leak, trigger earthquakes or contaminate groundwater, or had other limitations. That means carbon capture and storage would only have the potential to reduce human-caused warming by 0.7 degrees Celsius (1.26 Fahrenheit)—far less than previous estimates of around 5-6 degrees Celsius (9-10.8 degrees Fahrenheit), researchers said.

“Carbon storage is often portrayed as a way out of the climate crisis. Our findings make clear that it is a limited tool” and reaffirms “the extreme importance of reducing emissions as fast and as soon as possible,” said lead author Matthew Gidden, a research professor at the University Maryland’s Center for Global Sustainability. The study was led by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, where Gidden also is a senior researcher in the energy, climate and environment program.

  • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    4·
    1 day ago

    I read a popscience article about how US naval ships with nuclear reactors are now using carbon dissolved in seawater to create kerosene. So there’s that.

    • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah but that doesn’t have to be efficient. It just has to be more efficient than crossing back over the Pacific Ocean to stock up on jet fuel

      • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        11 hours ago

        Jet fuel is essentially kerosene. The idea is to fuel the jet engines on a nuclear aircraft carrier after the bombs drop. Namely sustaining a Pacific fleet against China after supply lines are cut.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          3·
          22 hours ago

          Ah, an aircraft carrier. That makes more sense.

          For whatever reason I forgot about those momentarily. That was weird.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
        2·
        1 day ago

        Jet-A is kerosene and a handful of additives, mostly to prevent gelling at low temperatures. The ability to produce jet fuel from sea water would be extremely useful, but I highly doubt they have developed a feasible system on board a carrier.