Discover
/
Article

Hope for CO2 air capture

SEP 01, 2023
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.

Related Topics
Related content
/
Article
The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope will survey the sky for vestiges of the universe’s expansion.
/
Article
Increasing transparency and informing advocacy and litigation efforts are the main goals of the online resource, which monitors the status of funds awarded by NSF and NIH.
/
Article
Research exchanges between US and Soviet scientists during the second half of the 20th century may be instructive for navigating today’s debates on scientific collaboration.
/
Article
A report authored by hundreds of climate scientists worldwide documents surface temperatures, humidity, glacier mass, and more.
This Content Appeared In
pt_cover0923.jpg

Volume 76, Number 9

Get PT in your inbox

pt_newsletter_card_blue.png
PT The Week in Physics

A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.

pt_newsletter_card_darkblue.png
PT New Issue Alert

Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.

pt_newsletter_card_pink.png
PT Webinars & White Papers

The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.

By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.