Cargando…
Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option?
Removing methane from the air is possible, but do the costs outweigh the benefits? This note explores the question of whether removing methane from the atmosphere is justifiable. Destruction of methane by oxidation to CO(2) eliminates 97% of the warming impact on a 100-yr time scale. Methane can be...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8646139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34865528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2021.0108 |
_version_ | 1784610463874547712 |
---|---|
author | Nisbet-Jones, Peter B. R. Fernandez, Julianne M. Fisher, Rebecca E. France, James L. Lowry, David Waltham, David A. Woolley Maisch, Ceres A. Nisbet, Euan G. |
author_facet | Nisbet-Jones, Peter B. R. Fernandez, Julianne M. Fisher, Rebecca E. France, James L. Lowry, David Waltham, David A. Woolley Maisch, Ceres A. Nisbet, Euan G. |
author_sort | Nisbet-Jones, Peter B. R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Removing methane from the air is possible, but do the costs outweigh the benefits? This note explores the question of whether removing methane from the atmosphere is justifiable. Destruction of methane by oxidation to CO(2) eliminates 97% of the warming impact on a 100-yr time scale. Methane can be oxidized by a variety of methods including thermal or ultraviolet photocatalysis and various processes of physical, chemical or biological oxidizers. Each removal method has energy costs (with the risk of causing embedded CO(2) emission that cancel the global warming gain), but in specific circumstances, including settings where air with high methane is habitually present, removal may be competitive with direct efforts to cut fugitive methane leaks. In all cases however, great care must be taken to ensure that the destruction has a net positive impact on the total global warming, and that the resources required would not be better used for stopping the methane from being emitted. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Rising methane: is warming feeding warming? (part 2)’. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8646139 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | The Royal Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86461392022-02-02 Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? Nisbet-Jones, Peter B. R. Fernandez, Julianne M. Fisher, Rebecca E. France, James L. Lowry, David Waltham, David A. Woolley Maisch, Ceres A. Nisbet, Euan G. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci Articles Removing methane from the air is possible, but do the costs outweigh the benefits? This note explores the question of whether removing methane from the atmosphere is justifiable. Destruction of methane by oxidation to CO(2) eliminates 97% of the warming impact on a 100-yr time scale. Methane can be oxidized by a variety of methods including thermal or ultraviolet photocatalysis and various processes of physical, chemical or biological oxidizers. Each removal method has energy costs (with the risk of causing embedded CO(2) emission that cancel the global warming gain), but in specific circumstances, including settings where air with high methane is habitually present, removal may be competitive with direct efforts to cut fugitive methane leaks. In all cases however, great care must be taken to ensure that the destruction has a net positive impact on the total global warming, and that the resources required would not be better used for stopping the methane from being emitted. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Rising methane: is warming feeding warming? (part 2)’. The Royal Society 2022-01-24 2021-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8646139/ /pubmed/34865528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2021.0108 Text en © 2021 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Articles Nisbet-Jones, Peter B. R. Fernandez, Julianne M. Fisher, Rebecca E. France, James L. Lowry, David Waltham, David A. Woolley Maisch, Ceres A. Nisbet, Euan G. Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title | Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title_full | Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title_fullStr | Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title_short | Is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
title_sort | is the destruction or removal of atmospheric methane a worthwhile option? |
topic | Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8646139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34865528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2021.0108 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nisbetjonespeterbr isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT fernandezjuliannem isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT fisherrebeccae isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT francejamesl isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT lowrydavid isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT walthamdavida isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT woolleymaischceresa isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption AT nisbeteuang isthedestructionorremovalofatmosphericmethaneaworthwhileoption |