CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 141Climate Change and GeoengineeringClimate Change Policy and EconomicsCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies

The Effects of Carbon Dioxide Removal on the Carbon Cycle

Open access
Keller, David P., Lenton, Andrew, Littleton, Emma W., Oschlies, Andreas, Scott, Vivian, Vaughan, Naomi E.·2018·Current Climate Change Reports
DOI 10.1007/s40641-018-0104-3PMC PMC6428234
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

release must be rapidly reduced to avoid potentially catastrophic impacts. Achieving this via emissions reductions alone will be very difficult. Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) has been suggested to complement and compensate for insufficient emissions reductions, through increasing natural carbon sinks, engineering new carbon sinks, or combining natural uptake with engineered storage. Here, we review the carbon cycle responses to different CDR approaches and highlight the often-overlooked interaction and feedbacks between carbon reservoirs that ultimately determines CDR efficacy. We also identify future research that will be needed if CDR is to play a role in climate change mitigation, these include coordinated studies to better understand (i) the underlying mechanisms of each method, (ii) how they could be explicitly simulated, (iii) how reversible changes in the climate and carbon cycle are, and (iv) how to evaluate and monitor CDR.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40641-018-0104-3

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Long-term changes to Earth system carbon fluxes, for example by shifting the burden of atmospheric CO2 uptake between oceanic and terrestrial reservoirs, will also impact OAE efficiency at scale.

    “In addition to the loss pathways discussed here, long-term changes to Earth system C fluxes, for example by shifting the burden of atmospheric CO2 uptake between oceanic vs terrestrial reservoirs, will also impact OAE efficiency at scale. 86”

    From A framework for understanding efficiency losses of Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (2026) · cites this paper as [86]

    The Ocean-Based CDR section reports that increased oceanic CO₂ uptake from artificial ocean alkalinization is accompanied by terrestrial carbon loss through climate–carbon-cycle feedbacks, and that ocean carbonate chemistry affects the magnitude of the Earth-system response. The land–ocean shift is reported for high-CO₂-emission scenarios; the paper does not establish that such shifts will affect alkalinity-enhancement efficiency at scale under all conditions. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 110

  1. [4]IPCC. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
  2. [5]UNFCCC. Paris Agreement of the 21st session of the Conference of Parties on climate change. 2016.
  3. [7]Rogelj J, Fricko O, Meinshausen M, Krey V, Zilliacus JJJ, Riahi K. Understanding the origin of Paris agreement emission uncertainties. Nat Commun [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2017;8:15748. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/ncomms15748%0A; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28585924. PMC5467211 28585924 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [9]Parson EA. Opinion: climate policymakers and assessments must get serious about climate engineering. Proc Natl Acad Sci [Internet]. 2017;114:9227–30. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/lookup/doi/10.1073/pnas.1713456114. PMC5584469 28811378 · DOI
  5. [10]Hansen J, Sato M, Kharecha P, von Schuckmann K, Beerling DJ, Cao J, et al. Young people’s burden: requirement of negative CO2 emissions. Earth Syst Dyn [Internet]. 2017;8:577–616. Available from: https://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/577/2017/.
  6. [12]Regnier P, Friedlingstein P, Ciais P, Mackenzie FT, Gruber N, Janssens IA, et al. Anthropogenic perturbation of the carbon fluxes from land to ocean. Nat Geosci [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited. All Rights Reserved. 2013;6:597–607. Available from: 10.1038/ngeo1830. · DOI
  7. [13]Cao L, Caldeira K. Atmospheric carbon dioxide removal: long-term consequences and commitment. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2015 Jan 9];5:024011. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/5/i=2/a=024011?key=crossref.5df1131fed99d0e3ec424b0060b26207.
  8. [14]Boucher O, Halloran PR, Burke EJ, Doutriaux-Boucher M, Jones CD, Lowe J, et al. Reversibility in an earth system model in response to CO 2 concentration changes. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2014 Sep 8];7:024013. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/7/i=2/a=024013?key=crossref.eb2eeb26bbd2088c8ec21123358988c9.
  9. [15]•• Jones CD, Ciais P, Davis SJ, Friedlingstein P, Gasser T, Peters GP, et al. Simulating the earth system response to negative emissions. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:095012. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=9/a=095012?key=crossref.6b5747055a178d1c59ffa940adb33091. A multi-model comparison of the carbon cycle response to CDR. They introduce a new metric to measure and assess the effectiveness of negative emissions.
  10. [16]Herrington T, Zickfeld K. Path independence of climate and carbon cycle response over a broad range of cumulative carbon emissions. Earth Syst Dyn [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2015 Jan 12];5:409–22. Available from: http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/5/409/2014/.
  11. [17]• Zickfeld K, MacDougall AH, Matthews HD. On the proportionality between global temperature change and cumulative CO 2 emissions during periods of net negative CO 2 emissions. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:055006. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=5/a=055006?key=crossref.636dc44f6dba4b8a51aeff076afe0be1. A study that systematically investigates the response of the carbon cycle and global mean temperature to CDR.
  12. [18]•• Tokarska KB, Zickfeld K. The effectiveness of net negative carbon dioxide emissions in reversing anthropogenic climate change. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2015;10:094013. Available from: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094013. A study that investigates how the pathways of CDR effect the carbon cycle and climate response. · DOI
  13. [19]MacDougall AH. Reversing climate warming by artificial atmospheric carbon-dioxide removal: can a Holocene-like climate be restored? Geophys Res Lett [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Oct 18];40:5480–5. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2013GL057467. · DOI
  14. [20]Vichi M Navarra A Fogli PG Adjustment of the natural ocean carbon cycle to negative emission rates Clim Chang [Internet] 2013 118 105 118 10.1007/s10584-012-0677-0 · DOI
  15. [21]Mathesius S Hofmann M Caldeira K Schellnhuber HJ Long-term response of oceans to CO2 removal from the atmosphere Nat Clim Chang [Internet] 2015 5 1107 1113 10.1038/nclimate2729 · DOI
  16. [22]House JI Colin Prentice I Le Quere C Maximum impacts of future reforestation or deforestation on atmospheric CO2 Glob Chang Biol [Internet] 2002 8 1047 1052 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00536.x · DOI
  17. [23]Fan C, Chen H, Li B, Xiong Z. Biochar reduces yield-scaled emissions of reactive nitrogen gases from vegetable soils across China. Biogeosciences. 2017;14(11):2851–63. 10.5194/bg-14-2851-2017 · DOI
  18. [24](Han) Weng Z, Van Zwieten L, Singh BP, Tavakkoli E, Joseph S, Macdonald LM, et al. Biochar built soil carbon over a decade by stabilizing rhizodeposits. Nat Clim Chang [Internet]. 2017;7. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nclimate3276. · DOI · Paper page
  19. [25]Van Groenigen JW Van Kessel C Hungate BA Oenema O Powlson DS Van Groenigen KJ Sequestering soil organic carbon: a nitrogen dilemma Environ Sci Technol 2017 51 4738 4739 10.1021/acs.est.7b01427 28426199 · DOI
  20. [27]Tokimatsu K, Yasuoka R, Nishio M. Global zero emissions scenarios: the role of biomass energy with carbon capture and storage by forested land use. Appl Energy [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2017;185:1899–906. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0306261915015275.
  21. [28]Boysen LR, Lucht W, Gerten D, Heck V, Lenton TM, Schellnhuber HJ. The limits to global-warming mitigation by terrestrial carbon removal. Earth’s Futur [Internet]. 2017;1–12. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2016EF000469. · DOI
  22. [29]Boysen LR, Lucht W, Gerten D, Heck V. Impacts devalue the potential of large-scale terrestrial CO 2 removal through biomass plantations. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:095010. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=9/a=095010?key=crossref.244d75c1a47b210f79f0a1cb65588a46.
  23. [30]Boysen LR Lucht W Gerten D Trade-offs for food production, nature conservation and climate limit the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal potential Glob Chang Biol 2017 23 4303 4317 10.1111/gcb.13745 28464416 · DOI
  24. [31]Muri H. The role of large-scale BECCS in the pursuit of the 1.5°C target: an Earth system model perspective. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2018;13(4):044010. 10.1088/1748-9326/aab324. · DOI
  25. [32]Boysen LR Brovkin V Arora VK Cadule P De Noblet-Ducoudré N Kato E Global and regional effects of land-use change on climate in 21st century simulations with interactive carbon cycle Earth Syst Dyn 2014 5 309 319 10.5194/esd-5-309-2014 · DOI
  26. [33]Heck V Hoff H Wirsenius S Meyer C Kreft H Land use options for staying within the planetary boundaries—synergies and trade-offs between global and local sustainability goals Glob Environ Chang [Internet] 2018 49 73 84 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.02.004 · DOI
  27. [35]Beringer T Lucht W Schaphoff S Bioenergy production potential of global biomass plantations under environmental and agricultural constraints GCB Bioenergy 2011 3 299 312 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01088.x · DOI
  28. [36]Sonntag S, Pongratz J, Reick CH, Schmidt H. Reforestation in a high-CO2 world-Higher mitigation potential than expected, lower adaptation potential than hoped for. Geophys Res Lett [Internet]. 2016;43:6546–53. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2016GL068824. · DOI
  29. [37]• Keller DP, Feng EY, Oschlies A. Potential climate engineering effectiveness and side effects during a high carbon dioxide-emission scenario. Nat Commun [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2014 [cited 2014 Feb 26];5:1–11. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/ncomms4304. A comparative evaluation of different CDR measures that includes an assessment of carbon cycle feedbacks. PMC3948393 24569320 · DOI
  30. [38]Lenton TM, Held H, Kriegler E, Hall JW, Lucht W, Rahmstorf S, et al. Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Proc Natl Acad Sci [Internet]. 2008;105:1786–93. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0705414105. PMC2538841 18258748 · DOI · Paper page
  31. [39]González MF Ilyina T Impacts of artificial ocean alkalinization on the carbon cycle and climate in earth system simulations Geophys Res Lett [Internet] 2016 43 6493 6502 10.1002/2016GL068576 · DOI
  32. [40]Bauman S Costa M Fong M House B Perez E Tan M Augmenting the biological pump: the shortcomings of geoengineered upwelling Oceanography [Internet] 2014 27 17 23 10.5670/oceanog.2014.79 · DOI
  33. [41]Pan Y Fan W Zhang D Chen J Huang H Liu S Research progress in artificial upwelling and its potential environmental effects Sci China Earth Sci [Internet] 2016 59 236 248 10.1007/s11430-015-5195-2 · DOI
  34. [42]Kreidenweis U, Humpenöder F, Stevanović M, Bodirsky BL, Kriegler E, Lotze-Campen H, et al. Afforestation to mitigate climate change: impacts on food prices under consideration of albedo effects. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2016;11:085001. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=8/a=085001?key=crossref.498dab12c59b27f71805e8cdbafc36f1.
  35. [43]Humpenöder F Popp A Stevanovic M Müller C Bodirsky BL Bonsch M Land-use and carbon cycle responses to moderate climate change: implications for land-based mitigation? Environ Sci Technol 2015 49 6731 6739 10.1021/es506201r 25939014 · DOI
  36. [44]Popp A, Humpenöder F, Weindl I, Bodirsky BL, Bonsch M, Lotze-campen H, et al. Land-use protection for climate change mitigation. 2014;4:2–5.
  37. [45]Cheng W, Moore JC, Cao L, Ji D, Zhao L. Simulated climate effects of desert irrigation geoengineering. Sci Rep [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group. 2017;7:46443. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep46443. PMC5394461 28418005
  38. [46]Davies-Barnard T, Valdes PJ, Singarayer JS, Pacifico FM, Jones CD. Full effects of land use change in the representative concentration pathways. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2014;9:114014. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/9/i=11/a=114014.
  39. [48]Naudts K, Chen Y, McGrath MJ, Ryder J, Valade A, Otto J, et al. Europes forest management did not mitigate climate warming. Science (80-.). [Internet]. 2016;351:597–600. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.aad7270. 26912701 · DOI · Paper page
  40. [49]Wang Y Yan X Wang Z Effects of regional afforestation on global climate J Water Clim Chang [Internet] 2015 6 191 10.2166/wcc.2014.136 · DOI
  41. [50]Bathiany S Claussen M Brovkin V Raddatz T Gayler V Combined biogeophysical and biogeochemical effects of large-scale forest cover changes in the MPI earth system model Biogeosciences 2010 7 1383 1399 10.5194/bg-7-1383-2010 · DOI
  42. [51]Kemena TP, Matthes K, Martin T, Wahl S, Oschlies A. Atmospheric feedbacks in North Africa from an irrigated, afforested Sahara. Clim Dyn [Internet]. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 2017;0:0. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00382-017-3890-8. · DOI
  43. [52]Ridgwell A Maslin MA Watson AJ Reduced effectiveness of terrestrial carbon sequestration due to an antagonistic response of ocean productivity Geophys Res Lett 2002 29 19-1 19-4 10.1029/2001GL014304 · DOI
  44. [53]Zhang Q, Wang YP, Matear RJ, Pitman AJ, Dai YJ. Nitrogen and phosphorous limitations significantly reduce future allowable CO 2 emissions. Geophys Res Lett [Internet]. 2014;41:632–7. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2013GL058352. · DOI
  45. [54]Taylor LL, Beerling DJ, Quegan S, Banwart SA, Sheffield S, Taylor LL. Simulating carbon capture by enhanced weathering with croplands: an overview of key processes highlighting areas of future model development. 2017. PMC5414688 28381633
  46. [55]Roberts DA, Paul NA, Dworjanyn SA, Bird MI, de Nys R. Biochar from commercially cultivated seaweed for soil amelioration. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2015;5:9665. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep09665. PMC4391317 25856799
  47. [56]Schenk PM Thomas-Hall SR Stephens E Marx UC Mussgnug JH Posten C Kruse O Hankamer B Second generation biofuels: high-efficiency microalgae for biodiesel production BioEnergy Res 2008 1 20 43 10.1007/s12155-008-9008-8 · DOI
  48. [57]Sommer R, Bossio D. Dynamics and climate change mitigation potential of soil organic carbon sequestration. J Environ Manag [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2014;144:83–7. Available from: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.017. 24929498 · DOI
  49. [58]Poeplau C, Don A. Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of cover crops—a meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2015;200:33–41. Available from: 10.1016/j.agee.2014.10.024. · DOI · Paper page
  50. [59]Sperow M. Estimating carbon sequestration potential on U.S. agricultural topsoils. Soil Tillage Res [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2016;155:390–400. Available from: 10.1016/j.still.2015.09.006. · DOI
  51. [60]Heck V, Gerten D, Lucht W, Boysen LR. Is extensive terrestrial carbon dioxide removal a ‘green’ form of geoengineering? A global modelling study. Glob Planet Chang [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2016;137:123–30. Available from: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2015.12.008. · DOI
  52. [61]Zhang D, Yan M, Niu Y, Liu X, van Zwieten L, Chen D, et al. Is current biochar research addressing global soil constraints for sustainable agriculture? Agric Ecosyst Environ [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2016;226:25–32. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880916302146.
  53. [63]Ravi S, Sharratt BS, Li J, Olshevski S, Meng Z, Zhang J. Particulate matter emissions from biochar-amended soils as a potential tradeoff to the negative emission potential. Sci Rep [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2016;6:35984. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep35984. PMC5080604 27782159
  54. [64]Jeffery S, Abalos D, Prodana M, Bastos AC, van Groenigen JW, Hungate BA, et al. Biochar boosts tropical but not temperate crop yields. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2017;12:053001. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/12/i=5/a=053001?key=crossref.bf9e05e5fb214cb193e8f1c2d66a7ac9.
  55. [65]Canadell JG, Schulze ED. Global potential of biospheric carbon management for climate mitigation. Nat Commun [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2014 [cited 2014 Nov 23];5:5282. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25407959. 25407959
  56. [66]Duarte CM, Wu J, Xiao X, Bruhn A, Krause-Jensen D. Can seaweed farming play a role in climate change mitigation and adaptation? Front Mar Sci [Internet]. 2017;4. Available from: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2017.00100/full. · DOI
  57. [67]Powlson DS, Stirling CM, Jat ML, Gerard BG, Palm CA, Sanchez PA, et al. Limited potential of no-till agriculture for climate change mitigation. Nat Clim Chang [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2014;4:678–83. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nclimate2292. · DOI · Paper page
  58. [69]Hartmann J West J Renforth P Köhler P De La Rocha CL Wolf-Gladrow D Enhanced chemical weathering as a geoengineering strategy to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide, a nutrient source and to mitigate ocean acidification Rev Geophys 2013 51 113 149 10.1002/rog.20004 · DOI · Paper page
  59. [70]Arora VK Montenegro A Small temperature benefits provided by realistic afforestation efforts Nat Geosci 2011 4 514 518 10.1038/ngeo1182 · DOI
  60. [71]• Smith P. Soil carbon sequestration and biochar as negative emission technologies. Glob Chang Biol [Internet]. 2016;22:1315–24. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/gcb.13178. A review of soil carbon and biochar CDR. 26732128 · DOI
  61. [72]Meysman FJR, Montserrat F. Negative CO 2 emissions via enhanced silicate weathering in coastal environments Biol Lett [Internet]. 2017;13:20160905. Available from: http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/lookup/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0905. PMC5414690 28381634 · DOI
  62. [74]Feng EY, Keller DP, Koeve W, Oschlies A. Could artificial ocean alkalinization protect tropical coral ecosystems from ocean acidification? Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2016;11:074008. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=7/a=074008?key=crossref.70dd72536bcafae0d7e0da2e421b7917.
  63. [75]Hauck J, Köhler P, Wolf-Gladrow D, Völker C. Iron fertilisation and century-scale effects of open ocean dissolution of olivine in a simulated CO 2 removal experiment. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:024007. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=2/a=024007?key=crossref.7d5ab8a17f2b2687fa59e1d3b4b66cf6.
  64. [76]Köhler P, Abrams JF, Völker C, Hauck J, Wolf-Gladrow DA. Geoengineering impact of open ocean dissolution of olivine on atmospheric CO2, surface ocean pH and marine biology. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2013;8:14009. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/8/i=1/a=014009.
  65. [77]Ilyina T, Wolf-Gladrow D, Munhoven G, Heinze C. Assessing the potential of calcium-based artificial ocean alkalinization to mitigate rising atmospheric CO 2 and ocean acidification. Geophys Res Lett [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Nov 11];40:5909–14. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2013GL057981. · DOI · Paper page
  66. [78]Paquay FS Zeebe RE Assessing possible consequences of ocean liming on ocean pH, atmospheric CO2 concentration and associated costs Int J Greenh Gas Control 2013 17 183 188 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.005 · DOI
  67. [79]Sonntag S, González MF, Ilyina T, Kracher D, Nabel JEMS, Niemeier U, et al. Quantifying and comparing effects of climate engineering methods on the Earth system. Earth’s Futur. 2018;6(2):149–68. 10.1002/2017EF000620. · DOI
  68. [81]Feng EY, Koeve W, Keller DP, Oschlies A. Model-based assessment of the CO 2 sequestration potential of coastal ocean alkalinization. Earth’s Futur [Internet]. 2017;5:1252–66. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2017EF000659. · DOI
  69. [82]Montserrat F Renforth P Hartmann J Knops P Leermakers M Meysman FJR Olivine dissolution in seawater: implications for CO2 sequestration through enhanced weathering in coastal environments Environ Sci Technol 2017 51 3960 3972 10.1021/acs.est.6b05942 28281750 PMC5382570 · DOI
  70. [83]Griffioen J Enhanced weathering of olivine in seawater: the efficiency as revealed by thermodynamic scenario analysis Sci Total Environ 2017 575 536 544 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.008 27644853 · DOI
  71. [84]Albright R, Caldeira L, Hosfelt J, Kwiatkowski L, Maclaren JK, Mason BM, et al. Reversal of ocean acidification enhances net coral reef calcification. Nature [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group. 2016;531:362–5. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature17155. 26909578 · DOI
  72. [85]Salter I, Schiebel R, Ziveri P, Movellan A, Lampitt R, Wolff GA. Carbonate counter pump stimulated by natural iron fertilization in the Polar Frontal Zone. Nat Geosci [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2015 Jan 12];7:885–9. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/ngeo2285. · DOI
  73. [86]Oschlies A Koeve W Rickels W Rehdanz K Side effects and accounting aspects of hypothetical large-scale Southern Ocean iron fertilization Biogeosciences 2010 7 4017 4035 10.5194/bg-7-4017-2010 · DOI
  74. [87]Robinson J, Popova EE, Yool A, Srokosz M, Lampitt RS, Blundell JR. How deep is deep enough? Ocean iron fertilization and carbon sequestration in the Southern Ocean. Geophys Res Lett. 2014;41(7):2489–95. 10.1002/2013GL058799. · DOI
  75. [88]Harrison DP. Global negative emissions capacity of ocean macronutrient fertilization. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2017;12:035001. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/12/i=3/a=035001?key=crossref.c48b784e5caabd045debab6fa4036e0d.
  76. [89]Lawrence MW. Efficiency of carbon sequestration by added reactive nitrogen in ocean fertilisation. Int J Global Warming. Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.15–33.
  77. [90]Matear RJ, Elliot B. Enhancement of oceanic uptake of anthropogenic CO 2 by macronutrient fertilization. J Geophys Res [Internet]. 2004;109:C04001. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1029/2000JC000321. · DOI
  78. [93]National Research Council Climate intervention [internet] 2015 Washington, D.C. National Academies Press
  79. [94]Kato E, Yamagata Y. BECCS capability of dedicated bioenergy crops under a future land-use scenario targeting net negative carbon emissions. Earth’s Futur [Internet]. 2014;2:421–39. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2014EF000249. · DOI
  80. [96]Williamson P. Emissions reduction: scrutinize CO2 removal methods. Nature [Internet]. 2016;530:5–7. Available from: http://www.nature.com/news/emissions-reduction-scrutinize-co2-removal-methods-1.19318. 26863967
  81. [97]Fuss S, Jones CD, Kraxner F, Peters GP, Smith P, Tavoni M, et al. Research priorities for negative emissions. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. 2016;11:115007. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=11/a=115007?key=crossref.0d8b5da77c87ad502a8129cad2731d44.
  82. [98]Mongin M, Baird ME, Hadley S, Lenton A. Optimising reef-scale CO 2 removal by seaweed to buffer ocean acidification. Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:034023. Available from: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034023. · DOI
  83. [99]Hill R, Bellgrove A, Macreadie PI, Petrou K, Beardall J, Steven A, et al. Can macroalgae contribute to blue carbon? An Australian perspective. Limnol Oceanogr [Internet]. 2015;2:n/a-n/a. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/lno.10128. · DOI
  84. [100]Johannessen SC, Macdonald RW. Geoengineering with seagrasses: is credit due where credit is given? Environ Res Lett [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2016;11:113001. Available from: http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/11/i=11/a=113001?key=crossref.1db6e1f7810fa528a2d86b3f3b5281a0.
  85. [101]Moreira D, Pires JCM. Atmospheric CO 2 capture by algae: negative carbon dioxide emission path. Bioresour Technol [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2016;215:371–9. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960852416303546. 27005790
  86. [102]Greene CH, Huntley ME, Archibald I, Gerber LN, Sills DL, Granados J, et al. Geoengineering, marine microalgae, and climate stabilization in the 21st century. Earth’s Futur [Internet]. 2017;5:278–84. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/2016EF000486. · DOI
  87. [103]Caldeira K, Bala G, Cao L. The science of geoengineering. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2014 Feb 20];41:231–56. Available from: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-earth-042711-105548. · DOI
  88. [104]Reith F Keller DP Oschlies A Revisiting ocean carbon sequestration by direct injection: a global carbon budget perspective Earth Syst Dyn [Internet] 2016 7 797 812 10.5194/esd-7-797-2016 · DOI · Paper page
  89. [105]Cao L. The effects of solar radiation management on the carbon cycle. Curr Clim Change Rep [Internet]. Current Climate Change Reports; 2018;1–10. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40641-018-0088-z. · DOI
  90. [106]Zhou S Flynn P Geoengineering downwelling ocean currents: a cost assessment Clim Chang 2005 71 203 220 10.1007/s10584-005-5933-0 · DOI
  91. [107]Flynn PC, Zhou JS. Can geoengineering sustain critical ocean currents? In: Badescu V, Cathcart RB, editors. Macro-engineering Seawater Unique Environ. Arid Lowl. Water Bodies Rehabil. [Internet]. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2011. p. 583–93. Available from: 10.1007/978-3-642-14779-1_26 · DOI
  92. [108]Strand SE Benford G Ocean sequestration of crop residue carbon: recycling fossil fuel carbon back to deep sediments Environ Sci Technol 2009 43 1000 1007 10.1021/es8015556 19320149 · DOI
  93. [109]Duarte CM, Losada IJ, Hendriks IE, Mazarrasa I, Marbà N. The role of coastal plant communities for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Nat Clim Chang [Internet]. Nature Publishing Group; 2013 [cited 2013 Nov 7];3:961–8. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nclimate1970. · DOI · Paper page
  94. [111]Heinze C, Meyer S, Goris N, Anderson L, Steinfeldt R, Chang N, et al. The ocean carbon sink—impacts, vulnerabilities and challenges. Earth Syst Dyn [Internet]. 2015;6:327–58. Available from: http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/6/327/2015/.
  95. [113]Le Quéré C, Andrew RM, Canadell JG, Sitch S, Korsbakken JI, Peters GP, et al. Global Carbon Budget 2016. Earth Syst Sci Data [Internet]. 2016;8:605–49. Available from: http://www.earth-syst-sci-data-discuss.net/essd-2016-51/.
  96. [114]Zhu Z Piao S Myneni RB Huang M Zeng Z Canadell JG Greening of the Earth and its drivers Nat Clim Chang 2016 6 791 795 10.1038/nclimate3004 · DOI · Paper page
  97. [115]Bonan GB. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2013 Sep 16];320:1444–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18556546. 18556546
  98. [116]Arneth A Sitch S Pongratz J Stocker BD Ciais P Poulter B Historical carbon dioxide emissions due to land use changes possibly larger than assumed Nat Geosci 2017 10 79 84 10.1038/ngeo2882 · DOI
  99. [117]Pongratz J Reick CH Raddatz T Caldeira K Claussen M Past land use decisions have increased mitigation potential of reforestation Geophys Res Lett 2011 38 1 5 10.1029/2011GL047848 · DOI
  100. [118]Houghton RA. Interactions between land-use change and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks. Curr Clim Change Rep [Internet]. Current Climate Change Reports; 2018;1–13. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40641-018-0099-9. · DOI
  101. [119]Hicks Pries CE, Castanha C, Porras R, Torn MS. The whole-soil carbon flux in response to warming. Science (80-.). [Internet]. 2017;1319:eaal1319. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aal1319. 28280251 · DOI
  102. [120]Stockmann U, Adams MA, Crawford JW, Field DJ, Henakaarchchi N, Jenkins M, et al. The knowns, known unknowns and unknowns of sequestration of soil organic carbon. Agric Ecosyst Environ [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2013;164:80–99. Available from: 10.1016/j.agee.2012.10.001. · DOI
  103. [121]Hewitt AJ, Booth BBB, Jones CD, Robertson ES, Wiltshire AJ, Sansom PG, et al. Sources of uncertainty in future projections of the carbon cycle. J Clim [Internet]. 2016;29:7203–13. Available from: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0161.1. · DOI
  104. [122]Friedlingstein P, Meinshausen M, Arora VK, Jones CD, Anav A, Liddicoat SK, et al. Uncertainties in CMIP5 climate projections due to carbon Cycle Feedbacks. J Clim [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2014 Sep 8];27:511–26. Available from: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00579.1. · DOI
  105. [123]Schuur E a G, McGuire A. D, Schädel C, Grosse G, Harden JW, Hayes DJ, et al. Climate change and the permafrost carbon feedback. Nature [Internet]. 2015;520:171–9. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature14338. 25855454 · DOI
  106. [124]Bauer JE, Cai W-J, Raymond P A., Bianchi TS, Hopkinson CS, Regnier P a. G. The changing carbon cycle of the coastal ocean. Nature [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Dec 5];504:61–70. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature12857. 24305149 · DOI
  107. [125]Koven CD Chambers JQ Georgiou K Knox R Negron-Juarez R Riley WJ Arora VK Brovkin V Friedlingstein P Jones CD Controls on terrestrial carbon feedbacks by productivity versus turnover in the CMIP5 Earth System Models Biogeosciences [Internet] 2015 12 5211 5228 10.5194/bg-12-5211-2015 · DOI
  108. [128]N’Yeurt ADR, Chynoweth DP, Capron ME, Stewart JR, Hasan MA. Negative carbon via ocean afforestation. Process Saf Environ Prot [Internet]. Institution of Chemical Engineers; 2012 [cited 2014 Aug 26];90:467–74. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957582012001206.
  109. [129]Zeng N Carbon sequestration via wood burial Carbon Balance Manag 2008 3 1 12 10.1186/1750-0680-3-1 PMC2266747 18173850 · DOI
  110. [130]Oeste FD de Richter R Ming T Caillol S Climate engineering by mimicking natural dust climate control: the iron salt aerosol method Earth Syst Dyn [Internet] 2017 8 1 54 10.5194/esd-8-1-2017 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, D. P., Lenton, A., Littleton, E. W., Oschlies, A., Scott, V., & Vaughan, N. E.
Affiliations
  • GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (DE)
  • CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere (AU)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
Corresponding author
Keller, David P.
ORCID
Venue
Current Climate Change Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-06-14
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
250-265
ISSN
2198-6061 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/s40641-018-0104-3
PMC
PMC6428234
OpenAlex
W2808229086
Cited by
141
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Current Climate Change Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (KE 2149/2-1, ComparCE-2)
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/P019749/1, NE/P019951/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Keywords
carbon dioxide removal, carbon cycle, carbon sink, climate change mitigation, emission reduction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review