Carbon Capture and Storage vs Carbon Offsetting

With global carbon emissions rising every year, it's more important than ever to find ways to reduce carbon in the atmosphere. In the biotechnology industry, carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon offsetting are two methods commonly used to tackle carbon emissions. In this post, we'll compare the two methods to see which is more effective.

Carbon Capture and Storage

Carbon capture and storage, also known as carbon capture and sequestration, involves capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants and industrial processes and storing them underground. The advantage of CCS is that it prevents CO2 from entering the atmosphere and contributing to global warming. In fact, it's estimated that CCS could reduce global carbon emissions by up to 20% by 2050.

However, CCS requires significant investments in infrastructure and technology, making it an expensive method. The cost of CCS varies depending on the location of the storage site and the type of technology used. According to the International Energy Agency, the cost of CCS ranges from $60 to $90 per ton of CO2.

Carbon Offsetting

Carbon offsetting involves funding projects that reduce or remove carbon emissions from the atmosphere, such as reforestation or renewable energy projects. The idea is to balance out your carbon emissions by investing in these projects. Carbon offsetting is a popular method because it's relatively easy to implement and has a lower cost than CCS.

However, some critics argue that carbon offsetting doesn't address the root cause of carbon emissions and may not actually reduce emissions in the long run. Furthermore, the carbon offset market is unregulated, and some projects may not be scientifically credible or may have other negative impacts, such as displacing indigenous communities from their land.

Which is Better?

Both CCS and carbon offsetting have advantages and disadvantages, making it hard to determine which is better. The most effective solution may depend on a variety of factors, such as the location and size of the emissions source, the availability of storage sites, the cost of the method, and other local factors.

In general, CCS is a more direct approach that prevents CO2 from entering the atmosphere, while carbon offsetting is a more indirect approach that supports emissions reduction projects. CCS is more expensive but may be more effective in reducing emissions in the long run. Carbon offsetting is easier to implement and has a lower cost, but the effectiveness of the carbon offset market varies widely.

Ultimately, the best approach may be a combination of both methods. For example, a company could invest in CCS for its own emissions and use carbon offsetting to offset emissions it can't reduce. However, it's important to confirm that carbon offset projects are scientifically credible and have real-world impacts.

References

1. International Energy Agency. (2021). Carbon capture and storage. https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-capture-and-storage
2. United Nations Climate Change. (n.d.). Carbon offsetting. https://unfccc.int/resources/carbon-offsetting
3. BBC. (2021). Carbon capture: What you need to know about catching CO2 to fight climate change. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58287111