raatoraamro

This is not true. Planting forests is great, but the ipcc says that in order to stay below 1.5 or even 2 degrees warming we need levels of carbon drawdown way beyond the capacity of even massive forestry and soil carbon efforts.

We need large scale engineered draw down of co2. Are the technologies nascent? Yes. Do we have to do it anyway? Also yes.

Also-CCS = capturing co2 from the factory flue stack. Carbon removal (what the question is about) is about pulling it out of the air. Not the same thing and most carbon removal is NOT funded by fossil fuel. There are many scientists and start ups working on this.

Climate models show we need drawdown beyond natural solutions to avoid the worst of climate change.

To learn more:

-https://cdrprimer.org/

-https://youtube.com/channel/UCxG5KAao5rJY3vvwbVUSv4g

-https://carbon180.org/

Makes sense. Thanks for your work and for the ama.

Agreed they need to be more widely embraced, and serve as a complement (not replacement) for emissions reductions.

In addition to those companies there are many startups working on this (though not enough-big problem), including some promising tech advancements which possibly eclipse those more established companies.

When doing your research, have you attempted to calculate potential affects of -solar radiation management -engineered carbon removal for example DAC

If so what did you find? What are the challenges of modeling these interventions?