A new way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere | Jennifer Wilcox

Prevodilac: Milana Popara Lektor: Milenka Okuka

400 ppm

to je trenutna prosečna koncentracija CO2 u vazduhu.

Šta to znači?

Four hundred parts per million:

Na svakih 400 molekula ugljen-dioksida

that's the approximate concentration of CO2 in the air today.

postoji milion molekula kiseonika i azota.

What does this even mean?

U ovoj prostorji danas, nalazi se oko 1800 osoba.

For every 400 molecules of carbon dioxide,

we have another million molecules of oxygen and nitrogen.

Zamislite da samo jedna osoba od svih nas nosi zelenu majicu,

i da treba da nađete tu jednu osobu.

In this room today, there are about 1,800 of us.

To je izazov sa kojim se suočavamo, kada je u pitanju odstranjivanje CO2

Imagine just one of us was wearing a green shirt,

direktno iz vazduha.

and you're asked to find that single person.

Zvuči vrlo jednostavno odstraniti CO2 iz vazduha.

That's the challenge we're facing when capturing CO2

Zapravo je vrlo teško.

directly out of the air.

Ali reći ću vam šta je lako:

izbegavati emisiju CO2 pre svega.

Sounds pretty easy,

pulling CO2 out of the air.

Ali mi to ne činimo.

It's actually really difficult.

But I'll tell you what is easy:

Zato sada moramo da mislimo unazad:

avoiding CO2 emissions to begin with.

kako odstraniti CO2 iz vazduha.

But we're not doing that.

Iako je to težak zadatak, moguće ga je ostvariti.

So now what we have to think about is going back;

Sa vama ću danas da podelim status te tehnologije

pulling CO2 back out of the air.

Even though it's difficult, it's actually possible to do this.

i u kom smeru će da se razvija u bliskoj budućnosti.

Planeta prirodno uklanja CO2 iz vazduha

And I'm going to share with you today where this technology is at

and where it just may be heading in the near future.

kroz morsku vodu, zemlju, biljke, pa čak i stene.

Now, the earth naturally removes CO2 from the air

I iako inženjeri i naučnici ulažu veliki napor

by seawater, soils, plants and even rocks.

da ubrzaju ove prirodne procese

And although engineers and scientists are doing the invaluable work

to jednostavno neće biti dovoljno.

Dobre vesti su da to nije sve.

Zahvaljujući ljudskoj domišljatosti, danas raspolažemo tehnologijom

to accelerate these natural processes,

it simply won't be enough.

za uklanjanje CO2 iz vazduha

The good news is, we have more.

koristeći hemijski pristup.

Thanks to human ingenuity, we have the technology today

Ja gledam na to kao na vrstu veštačke šume.

to remove CO2 out of the air

Postoje dva pristupa kako stvoriti takvu šumu.

using a chemically manufactured approach.

I like to think of this as a synthetic forest.

Jedan pristup je koristeći hemikalije rastvorene u vodi, koje vežu za sebe CO2.

There are two basic approaches to growing or building such a forest.

Drugi pristup se bazira na čvrstim materijalima koji vežu za sebe CO2.

One is using CO2-grabbing chemicals dissolved in water.

Koji god pristup izaberete, oni se svode na isto.

Another is using solid materials with CO2-grabbing chemicals.

Ovo što vam upravo pokazujem je kako bi takav sistem mogao izgledati.

No matter which approach you choose, they basically look the same.

Ovo je uređaj za prečišćavanje vazduha.

Možda primećujete da mora biti veoma širok,

So what I'm showing you here is what a system might look like

kako bi imao dovoljno veliku površinu i prečistio sav neophodan vazduh

to do just this.

This is called an air contactor.

jer, setite se, cilj je da uhvatimo svega 400 molekula od ukupno milion.

You can see it has to be really, really wide

in order to have a high enough surface area

to process all of the air required,

U slučaju tečnog pristupa,

because remember,

uzme se materijal za punjenje velike površine,

we're trying to capture just 400 molecules out of a million.

njime se napuni prečišćivač vazduha,

Using the liquid-based approach to do this,

a zatim se taj materijal pomoću pumpi natopi tečnošću za vezivanje CO2,

you take this high surface area packing material,

te se pomoću ventilatora koji se nalaze sa prednje strane,

you fill the contactor with the packing material,

propušta vazduh kroz tečnost.

you use pumps to distribute liquid across the packing material,

CO2 se odstranjuje iz vazduha,

and you can use fans, as you can see in the front,

putem reakcije sa molekulima iz tečnosti koji snažno vezuju za sebe CO2.

to bubble the air through the liquid.

The CO2 in the air is separated [by] the liquid

Kako bi se odstranilo dosta CO2,

by reacting with the really strong-binding CO2 molecules in solution.

prečišćivač mora biti što dublji.

Međutim, mora se napraviti kompromis jer, što je prečišćivač dublji,

And in order to capture a lot of CO2,

to se više energije mora utrošiti kako bi se vazduh kroz njega propuštao.

you have to make this contactor deeper.

Iz tog razloga, ovi prečišćivači vazduha imaju karakterističan dizajn,

But there's an optimization,

because the deeper you make that contactor,

the more energy you're spending on bubbling all that air through.

a to je da imaju veliku površinu, ali relativno malu debljinu.

So air contactors for direct air capture have this unique characteristic design,

Nakon što se odstrani CO2 iz vazduha,

where they have this huge surface area, but a relatively thin thickness.

poželjno je da postoji mogućnost reciklaže materijala kojim je CO2 odstranjen

iznova i iznova.

And now once you've captured the CO2,

Količina CO2 koja se treba ukloniti je ogromna, te stoga proces

you have to be able to recycle that material that you used to capture it,

mora biti održiv, umjesto da se materijal za prečišćavanje samo jednom iskoristi.

over and over again.

The scale of carbon capture is so enormous

Reciklaža materijala zahteva ogromnu količinu toplote,

that the capture process must be sustainable,

jer razmislite: CO2 je toliko razblažen u vazduhu,

and you can't use a material just once.

a matrijal za prečišćavanje ga veže snažno za sebe,

And so recycling the material requires an enormous amount of heat,

te je stoga potrebna ogromna količina toplote da bi se reciklirao.

because think about it: CO2 is so dilute in the air,

Tokom reciklaže materijala pomoću toplote,

that material is binding it really strong,

koncentrovani CO2, dobijen od CO2 razblaženog u vazduhu se oslobađa,

and so you need a lot of heat in order to recycle the material.

And to recycle the material with that heat,

i time se dobija CO2 visokog stepena čistoće.

what happens is that concentrated CO2 that you got from dilute CO2 in the air

To je vrlo važno,

jer CO2 visokog stepena čistoće je lakše prevesti u tečno stanje,

is now released,

and you produce high-purity CO2.

lakše ga je transportovati, bilo da je u cevi ili u kamionu,

And that's really important,

i čak ga je lakše koristiti,

because high-purity CO2 is easier to liquify,

npr. kao gorivo ili kao hemikaliju.

easier to transport, whether it's in a pipeline or a truck,

Htela bih da kažem nešto više o utrošenoj energiji.

or even easier to use directly,

Toplota neophodna da bi se materijal za prečišćavanje regenerisao ili reciklirao

say, as a fuel or a chemical.

u potpunosti diktira energiju i sve dalje troškove ovog procesa.

So I want to talk a little bit more about that energy.

The heat required to regenerate or recycle these materials

Stoga, postavljam sledeće pitanje:

absolutely dictates the energy and the subsequent cost of doing this.

šta mislite, koliko energije je potrebno

da bi se uklonilo milion tona CO2 iz vazduha u toku godine?

So I ask a question:

How much energy do you think it takes

Odgovor je: potrebna je elektrana.

Potrebna je elektrana kako bi se CO2 odstranio direktno iz vazduha.

to remove a million tons of CO2 from the air

Zavisno od izabranog pristupa,

in a given year?

ta elektrana bi morala proizvoditi između 300 i 500 megavati električne energije.

The answer is: a power plant.

It takes a power plant to capture CO2 directly from the air.

Pri tome, mora se voditi računa o tome koji tip elektrane se koristi.

Depending on which approach you choose,

the power plant could be on the order of 300 to 500 megawatts.

Ako izaberete elektranu na bazi uglja,

na kraju ćete proizvesti više CO2 nego što možete odstraniti.

And you have to be careful about what kind of power plant you choose.

Hajde sada da pričamo o troškovima.

Energetski-intenzivna verzija ove tehnologije

If you choose coal,

you end up emitting more CO2 than you capture.

može da košta do $1,000 po toni

Now let's talk about costs.

i to samo da bi se uhvatio CO2. Sta to znači?

An energy-intensive version of this technology

Ako biste CO2 odstranjen iz vazduha pretvorili u tečno gorivo,

could cost you as much as $1,000 a ton

just to capture it.

zarada bi iznosila 50 dolara po galonu.

Let's translate that.

To je preskupo i ne isplati se.

If you were to take that very expensive CO2 and convert it to a liquid fuel,

Šta možemo da učinimo kako bismo smanjili ove troškove?

To je delimično posao kojim se ja bavim.

that comes out to 50 dollars a gallon.

That's way too expensive; it's not feasible.

Danas postoji komercijalna kompanija,

So how could we bring these costs down?

koja može odraditi ovaj posao po ceni od $600 po toni CO2.

That's, in part, the work that I do.

Postoji niz drugih kompanija koje razvijaju tehnologiju

There's a company today, a commercial-scale company,

koja bi mogla da bude i jeftinija od toga.

that can do this as low as 600 dollars a ton.

Reći ću vam ponešto o nekolicini drugih kompanija.

There are several other companies that are developing technologies

Jedna se zove Karbon indžiniring

Nalazi se u Kanadi.

that can do this even cheaper than that.

Oni koriste tečni pristup za uklanjanje CO2

I'm going to talk to you a little bit

u kombinaciji sa gorivim prirodnim gasom koji je jeftin, može se naći u izobilju

about a few of these different companies.

One is called Carbon Engineering.

They're based out of Canada.

i koji obezbeđuje neophodnu toplotu.

They use a liquid-based approach for separation

Oni imaju pametan pristup koji im omogućuje da uhvate CO2 iz vazduha,

combined with burning super-abundant, cheap natural gas

to supply the heat required.

ali i CO2 koji se oslobodi prilikom gorenja prirodnog gasa.

They have a clever approach

that allows them to co-capture the CO2 from the air

Na ovaj način izbegavaju dodatno zagađenje i smanjuju troškove.

and the CO2 that they generate from burning the natural gas.

Švajcarska kompanija Klajmvorks i američka kompanija Global termostat

And so by doing this,

they offset excess pollution and they reduce costs.

koriste drugačiji pristup.

Ove kompanije koriste čvrste materijale za prečišćavanje.

Klajmvorks koristi topolotu iz zemlje,

Switzerland-based Climeworks and US-based Global Thermostat

geotermalnu toplotu

use a different approach.

ili čak paru koja se oslobađa u toku industrijskih procesa,

They use solid materials for capture.

kako bi smanjili zagađenje i troškove.

Climeworks uses heat from the earth,

Global termostat koristi drugačiji pristup.

or geothermal,

or even excess steam from other industrial processes

Oni se fokusiraju na količinu topolote i brzinu kojom se ona kreće kroz materijal,

to cut down on pollution and costs.

Global Thermostat takes a different approach.

kako bi mogli da oslobode i proizvedu CO2 velikom brzinom,

They focus on the heat required

and the speed in which it moves through the material

što im istovremeno omogućuje da imaju kompaktniji dizajn

so that they're able to release and produce that CO2

i sveukupno manje troškove.

at a really fast rate,

Ali to nije sve.

which allows them to have a more compact design

Veštačka šuma ima ogromnu prednost u poređenju sa prirodnom šumom,

and overall cheaper costs.

a to je njena veličina.

And there's more still.

Sledeća fotografija koju ću vam pokazati predstavlja mapu amazonske prašume.

A synthetic forest has a significant advantage over a real forest: size.

Amazonija može da odstrani 1,6 milijardi tona CO2 svake godine.

This next image that I'm showing you is a map of the Amazon rainforest.

To je otprilike 25% ukupne emisije CO2 u SAD-u.

The Amazon is capable of capturing 1.6 billion tons of CO2 each year.

Površina koja je neophodna za veštačku šumu,

This is the equivalent of roughly 25 percent

tj. za postrojenje koje uklanja CO2, a koje bi uklonilo tu istu količinu CO2

of our annual emissions in the US.

je 500 puta manja.

The land area required for a synthetic forest

Dodatno, za veštačku šumu nije neophodno koristiti obradivu zemlju,

or a manufactured direct air capture plant

to capture the same

is 500 times smaller.

te samim tim ne postoji nadmetanje sa poljoprivrednim zemljištem i hranom,

In addition, for a synthetic forest,

a takođe ne postoji potreba seče drveća.

you don't have to build it on arable land,

so there's no competition with farmland or food,

Htela bih da se vratim korak unazad, i da pričamo o konceptu negativne emisije.

and there's also no reason to have to cut down any real trees

Negativna emisija podrazumeva da je CO2 iz vazduha

to do this.

I want to step back,

zauvek odstranjen iz atmosfere,

and I want to bring up the concept of negative emissions again.

što znači vratiti ga pod zemlju, odakle i potiče.

Negative emissions require that the CO2 separated

be permanently removed from the atmosphere forever,

Da budemo iskreni ipak, niko danas nije plaćen za to, makar ne dovoljno.

which means putting it back underground,

Kompanije koje se bave razvojem tehnologije za uklanjanje CO2 iz vazduha

where it came from in the first place.

But let's face it, nobody gets paid to do that today --

su zapravo zainteresovane da od uklonjenog CO2

naprave nešto korisno, profitabilan proizvod.

at least not enough.

So the companies that are developing these technologies

To bi mogla biti tečna goriva, plastika

are actually interested in taking the CO2

ili čak sintetički šljunak.

and making something useful out of it, a marketable product.

Nemojte me pogrešno shvatiti, tržišta ugljenika su sjajna.

It could be liquid fuels, plastics

Ali takođe ne bih da vas razočaram.

or even synthetic gravel.

Ova tržišta nisu dovoljno velika kako bi rešila našu klimatsku krizu,

And don't get me wrong -- these carbon markets are great.

te stoga moramo da razmislimo šta bi zapravo bilo dovoljno.

But I also don't want you to be disillusioned.

These are not large enough to solve our climate crisis,

Jedna stvar koja je apsolutno pozitivna vezano za tržišta ugljenika

and so what we need to do is we need to actually think about

jeste da ona omogućuju izgradnju novih postrojenja za prečišćavanje,

what it could take.

One thing I'll absolutely say is positive about the carbon markets

a sa svakim novim izgrađenim postrojenjem naučimo nešto novo.

A sa novim znanjem, imamo mogućnost da smanjimo troškove.

is that they allow for new capture plants to be built,

and with every capture plant built,

Ali takođe, moramo biti voljni da investiramo, kao globalno društvo.

we learn more.

And when we learn more,

we have an opportunity to bring costs down.

Možemo imati najbolje ideje i tehnologiju na svetu,

But we also need to be willing to invest

ali to neće biti dovoljno kako bismo ostvarili značajan uticaj na klimu.

as a global society.

We could have all of the clever thinking and technology in the world,

Potrebne su nam regulacije, subvencije, te porezi na ugljenik.

but it's not going to be enough

in order for this technology to have a significant impact on climate.

Ima nas koji smo voljni da platimo više,

We really need regulation,

we need subsidies,

ali ono što je neophodno jeste da CO2-neutralni, CO2-negativni put

taxes on carbon.

There are a few of us that would absolutely be willing to pay more,

bude pristupačan većini društva, kako bi imao uticaj na klimu.

but what will be required

Pored ovakvih investicija, moramo investirati u istraživanja i razvoj.

is for carbon-neutral, carbon-negative paths

to be affordable for the majority of society

in order to impact climate.

Kako bi to moglo da izgleda?

In addition to those kinds of investments,

SAD su 1966. investirale oko 0,5% BDP-a

we also need investments in research and development.

So what might that look like?

u Apolo program.

In 1966, the US invested about a half a percent of gross domestic product

Ovaj program je bezbedno odveo ljude na Mesec, a zatim nazad na Zemlju.

Danas 0,5% BDP-a iznosi oko 100 milijardi dolara.

in the Apollo program.

It got people safely to the moon

Znajući da je prečišćavanje vazduha jedan vid borbe protiv klimatskih promena,

and back to the earth.

Half a percent of GDP today is about 100 billion dollars.

zamislite kada bismo mogli da investiramo 20% BDP-a, 20 biliona dolara.

So knowing that direct air capture

Dalje, zamislite da možemo dodatno smanjiti troškove na 100 dolara po toni.

is one front in our fight against climate change,

imagine that we could invest 20 percent, 20 billion dollars.

To će biti teško, ali je jedan od faktora koji čine moj posao zanimljivim.

Further, let's imagine that we could get the costs down

I kako to izgleda, 20 biliona dolara, 100 dolara po toni?

to a 100 dollars a ton.

That's going to be hard, but it's part of what makes my job fun.

Ovo zahteva proizvodnju 200 veštačkih šuma,

od kojih bi svaka uklanjala milion tona CO2 godišnje.

And so what does that look like,

20 billion dollars,100 dollars a ton?

That requires us to build 200 synthetic forests,

To je otprilike 5% godišnje emisije u SAD-u.

each capable of capturing a million tons of CO2 per year.

Ne zvuči kao mnogo.

To ipak jeste značajna količina.

That adds up to about five percent of US annual emissions.

Ako bacite pogled na količinu emisije prilikom dugolinijskog transporta

i komercijalnih avionskih letova, ona iznosi oko 5%.

It doesn't sound like much.

Turns out, it's actually significant.

Naša potreba za tečnim gorivima, čini ove emisije vrlo teškim za izbeći.

If you look at the emissions associated with long-haul trucking

and commercial aircraft,

they add up to about five percent.

Prema tome, ova investicija bi definitivno mogla biti značajna.

Our dependence on liquid fuels makes these emissions

really difficult to avoid.

E sada, u pogledu zemljišne površine, koliko je potrebno za 200 postrojenja?

So this investment could absolutely be significant.

Ispada da je potrebna površina otprilike jednaka polovini Vankuvera.

Now, what would it take in terms of land area to do this,

I to u slučaju prirodnog gasa za pogon.

200 plants?

Ali setite se da je mana prirodnog gasa što takođe emituje CO2.

It turns out that they would take up about half the land area of Vancouver.

Ako koristite prirodni gas, na kraju uklonite samo 1/3 onoga što ste namerili,

That's if they were fueled by natural gas.

But remember the downside of natural gas -- it also emits CO2.

osim ako imate pametni pristup koji Karbon indžiniring koristi.

So if you use natural gas to do direct air capture,

you only end up capturing about a third of what's intended,

Ako bismo koristili alternativni pristup i koristili energiju sunca ili vetra,

unless you have that clever approach of co-capture

potrebna zemljišna površina bi morala biti oko 15 puta veća,

that Carbon Engineering does.

And so if we had an alternative approach

što je površina savezne republike Nju Džerzi.

and used wind or solar to do this,

Jedna od stvari o kojoj najviše razmišljam u mom radu i istraživanju

the land area would be about 15 times larger,

je kako optimizovati lokaciju ovih postrojenja,

looking at the state of New Jersey now.

imajući u vidu lokalne resurse,

One of the things that I think about in my work and my research

bilo da je to zemlja, voda, jeftina i čista energija,

is optimizing and figuring out where we should put these plants

jer npr., možete koristiti čistu energiju da iz vode oslobodite vodonik,

and think about the local resources available --

whether it's land, water, cheap and clean electricity --

što je odlična zamena za prirodan gas, koja ne sadrži ugljenik,

because, for instance, you can use clean electricity

a koja bi pružila neophodnu toplotu.

to split water to produce hydrogen,

Ali htela bih da se kratko osvrnem na negativnu emisiju.

which is an excellent, carbon-free replacement for natural gas,

Ne treba razmišljati o negativnoj emisiji kao o magičnom rešenju,

to supply the heat required.

ali nam ona može pomoći, ako budemo stagnirali u smanjenju emisije CO2.

But I want us to reflect a little bit again on negative emissions.

Negative emissions should not be considered a silver bullet,

Ali to je upravo razlog zašto moramo biti oprezni.

but they may help us if we continue to stall

Ovaj pristup zvuči tako primamljivo, da može biti rizičan,

at cutting down on CO2 pollution worldwide.

jer neki se mogu osloniti na njega kao na vrstu sveukupnog rešenja klimatske krize.

But that's also why we have to be careful.

This approach is so alluring that it can even be risky,

Može podstaći ljude da nastave goriti fosilna goriva 24h dnevno.

as some may cling onto it as some kind of total solution to our climate crisis.

365 dana godišnje.

It may tempt people to continue to burn fossil fuels 24 hours a day,

Moje mišljenje je da ne treba gledati na negativnu emisiju

kao zamenu za zaustavljanje zagađenja,

već radije kao na dodatak postojećem portfoliju, koji uključuje sve,

365 days a year.

I argue that we should not see negative emissions

as a replacement for stopping pollution,

od povećane energetske efikasnosti

preko obnovljive energije,

but rather, as an addition to an existing portfolio that includes everything,

do unapređenog zemljoradništva.

sve ovo zajedno će nas jednog dana dovesti na put nulte emisije.

from increased energy efficiency

to low-energy carbon

Jedan primer iz mog ličnog života:

to improved farming --

will all collectively get us on a path to net-zero emissions one day.

moj suprug je lekar hitne pomoći.

Uvek se divim spasilačkom poslu koji on i njegove kolege rade svaki dan.

A little bit of self-reflection:

my husband is an emergency physician.

Sa druge strane, kada pričam sa njima o mom radu na uklanjanju CO2,

And I find myself amazed by the lifesaving work

oni se jednako oduševe,

that he and his colleagues do each and every day.

a to je zato što borba protiv klimatskih promena uklanjanjem CO2

Yet when I talk to them about my work on carbon capture,

se ne svodi samo na spasavanje polarnog medveda ili glečera.

I find that they're equally amazed,

and that's because combatting climate change by capturing carbon

To je borba za ljudske živote.

Veštačka šuma možda nikada neće biti lepa poput prirodne,

isn't just about saving a polar bear

or a glacier.

It's about saving human lives.

ali bi nam mogla omogućiti da spasimo ne samo Amazoniju

A synthetic forest may not ever be as pretty as a real one,

već i sve ljude koje volimo i do kojih nam je stalo,

kao i sve buduće generacije i modernu civilizaciju.

but it could just enable us to preserve not only the Amazon,

but all of the people

that we love and cherish,

Hvala vam.

(Aplauz)

as well as all of our future generations

and modern civilization.

Thank you.

(Applause)