Discover
/
Article

Hope for CO2 air capture

SEP 01, 2023

DOI: 10.1063/PT.3.5302

Klaus S. Lackner

John Tanner’s summary of carbon dioxide air-capture costs (Physics Today, February 2023, page 12 ) takes the glass-half-empty approach to an extreme. At the average US retail price for electricity (12¢/kWh), the thermodynamic energy demand of direct air capture 1 would indeed add $15 to the cost of collecting a metric ton of CO2 from air. But large power consumers, such as aluminum smelters, get much better pricing. 2

Moreover, removing 8 billion metric tons of CO2 for a mere $120 billion would be a good deal. It would cancel past emissions from about 20 billion barrels of oil. The world buys that much oil every 200 days for $1.6 trillion. Prices for such a quantity have fluctuated between $200 billion and $3 trillion over the years. The implied surcharge of $6 per barrel seems cheap for fixing the climate.

Can air capture achieve such economics? The bad news is that current costs are above $500 per metric ton of CO2. I agree with Tanner that thermodynamic limits plus unavoidable raw-material inputs set a lower bound around $10–$20 per metric ton. 3 The good news is that no physical law prevents approaching that bound through learning by doing. Betting against an order-of-magnitude cost reduction ignores the two-orders-of-magnitude reduction in wind and solar. It collides with the frequently expressed optimism that batteries will get cheaper if we produce a lot of them. Mass production has proven over and over that costs can drop 10-fold if cumulative capacity increases 1000-fold. 4 For air capture, which needs to grow more than a millionfold, that represents just the beginning of the growth curve. 5 Obviously, success is not guaranteed, but closing the door to the opportunity without trying is self-defeating.

References

  1. 1. K. S. Lackner, Energy 50, 38 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.09.012

  2. 2. See, for instance, “Power costs in the production of primary aluminum,” MetalMiner, 26 February 2009, reposted 24 November 2015, https://agmetalminer.com/?s=power+costs .

  3. 3. K. Lackner, H.-J. Ziock, P. Grimes, Carbon Dioxide Extraction from Air: Is It an Option?, rep. no. LA-UR-99-583, US Department of Energy (1 February 1999).

  4. 4. E. Dahlgren et al., Eng. Econ. 58, 231 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/0013791X.2013.825038

  5. 5. K. S. Lackner, H. Azarabadi, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 60, 8196 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c04839

More about the Authors

Klaus S. Lackner. (klaus.lackner@asu.edu) Arizona State University, Tempe.

This Content Appeared In
pt_cover0923.jpg

Volume 76, Number 9

Related content
/
Article
/
Article
/
Article
/
Article
/
Article
/
Article

Get PT in your inbox

Physics Today - The Week in Physics

The Week in Physics" is likely a reference to the regular updates or summaries of new physics research, such as those found in publications like Physics Today from AIP Publishing or on news aggregators like Phys.org.

Physics Today - Table of Contents
Physics Today - Whitepapers & Webinars
By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.