Is Carbon Capture worth considering?
During an otherwise impressive presentation at the COP[1], Al Gore criticized carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, calling them "mechanical vacuuming machines" and claiming they are "captured by Big Oil interests." He emphasized that, as of 2024, CCS accounts for only 0.086% of all captured CO₂. However, if we look beyond these soundbites:
- It's about potential and acceleration. Similar arguments were made in the 1860s against mineral oil to promote whale oil—but who uses whale oil nowadays?
- The changing potential of natural carbon sinks. In a world where the Amazon rainforest—often called the "Lungs of the Earth"—is at risk of becoming a fire-prone savannah[2], the effectiveness of forest-based carbon capture is uncertain.
CCS technologies are indeed hard to develop and even harder to scale. While they may be a long-shot option in our efforts to curb climate change, all options must remain on the table. That's why I'm thrilled to see startups like CuspAI[3] developing innovative ways to capture carbon from the atmosphere using AI. It's about creating high-potential solutions, as long as they don't compete with our current best choices.
- https://youtu.be/_w2d-SnjXsU?t=3082 ↩︎
- Critical transitions in the Amazon forest system https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06970-0 ↩︎
- https://www.cusp.ai/ ↩︎