Basic building blocks of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) paradigm fail molecular chemistry. [emphasis, links added]
The idea that we can and must reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to avoid climate catastrophes such as runaway global warming or ocean acidification does not stand up to intense academic scrutiny, according to a new study.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a mitigation strategy that proposes storing carbon dioxide underground in order to reduce emissions to “net zero” by 2050. practice [of CCS] Tens of trillions of dollars are expected to be spent over the next few decades.
New analysis shows that high-level or ambitious CCS scenarios are expected to reduce today's emissions by about half by 2050.
But these economically demanding CCS options are expected to cost $30 trillion more than those that reduce emissions by just one-tenth of today's emissions.
Either way, the cost of CCS is astronomical.
But can CCS really achieve the desired results and reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations? chemical theory No, CCS “does not reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations at all.” From the study:
“The crux of the matter is that, unlike photosynthesis in plants, perfect sequestration of carbon dioxide does not magically release the oxygen that is effectively 'sequestered' in the carbon dioxide and water molecules produced by combustion.”
“If the fuel was made from pure carbon, the net result in the composition of the atmosphere would be a slight decrease in oxygen concentration…and a concomitant slight decrease in oxygen concentration. Increase Because the denominator shrinks slightly, the carbon dioxide concentration changes.
Regarding alarmist claims of “ocean acidification”, the modern trend of rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is thought to be driving changes in pH. However, the chemical basis of this narrative is questionable.
Using the stoichiometric combustion equation, we know For every 1 ppm increase in carbon dioxide due to the burning of fossil fuels, oxygen concentrations decrease by approximately 2.15 ppm. (For example, over 20 years, carbon dioxide has increased by 50 ppm, while oxygen has decreased by about 130 ppm.)
But this conceptualization raises fundamental problems for the paradigm of human-driven changes in ocean pH.
“If the decrease in atmospheric oxygen concentration is directly related to the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, then how can the ocean absorb enough carbon dioxide to cause ocean acidification, especially since the ocean is highly chemically buffered?”
“If the observed decrease in atmospheric oxygen is explained by the observed increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, as expected, due to combustion, then where does the additional carbon dioxide come from that would contribute to ocean acidification?”
These are just a few of the many other chemistry-based challenges to the AGW narrative described in this article. Well worth reading.
Read more in the Tip-Free Zone
