Impact of Climate on the Global Capacity for Enhanced Rock Weathering on Croplands

Baek, Seung H.; Kanzaki, Yoshiki; Lora, Juan M.; Planavsky, Noah J.; Reinhard, Christopher T.; Zhang, Shuang

doi:10.1029/2023ef003698

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After basalt is spread to the watershed of river segment, we assume it dissolves congruently and all dissolved solutes enter the selected river segment. The dissolution rate is set as 1 ton of basalt per hectare per year in our baseline scenario, a reasonable assumption that is comparable to previous modeling and field studies (5,9,26). We then multiply this assumed dissolution rate by the watershed area of the selected river segment to determine the total annual input of basalt solutes into the river segment.…”

Section: Tracking River Responses To Ew Using the Drn Modelmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Terrestrial enhanced rock weathering (EW) -the intentional application of crushed alkaline (carbonate or silicate) rock to soil to drive fixation of atmospheric CO2 as dissolved bicarbonate (HCO3 -) -has been suggested to offer a scalable, relatively low cost form of CDR with durability on thousand-year timescales (4)(5)(6)(7)(8). The potential magnitude of carbon removal through EW, though still poorly defined, may rival or surpass terrestrial ecosystem sequestration (e.g., via afforestation or soil organic carbon storage)and is potentially >5 gigatons of CO2 (GtCO2; 10 9 tons) per year (5,(9)(10)(11). Because EW uses existing technology and infrastructure, it is ready to deploy and has potential for achieving relatively rapid scale alongside other efforts to help meet net-zero greenhouse gas emission goals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constraining carbon loss from rivers following terrestrial enhanced rock weathering

Zhang,

Reinhard,

Liu

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enhanced rock weathering (EW) has garnered increasing interest as a promising technique for durable carbon dioxide removal, with a range of potential co-benefits including increased soil pH and nutrient release. However, the impacts of EW on river chemistry and the potential loss of initially captured CO2 during river transport remain poorly constrained. The current lack of tools for robustly predicting the effect of riverine degassing on the EW life cycle undermines the use of this practice as a carbon mitigation strategy. Here, we present results from a first-of-its-kind dynamic river network model designed to quantify the impact of EW on river carbonate chemistry in North American watersheds. We map key water quality parameters across the river network of North America using machine learning, and use a dynamic river network model to simulate changes in river carbonate chemistry and carbon degassing during EW. Our model predicts low carbon loss (<5%) from river networks and limited changes to carbonate mineral saturation states for many of the river pathways explored here. However, there are some instances in which carbon degassing is significantly higher (>15%) and it is possible to induce large changes in carbonate saturation states, indicating that riverine carbon storage and the impacts of EW on river chemistry must be evaluated in a deployment-specific context. Although there remains uncertainty in the impact of EW on stream/river chemistry, our approach represents a step forward in the development of tools for quantifying the impacts of carbon cycling in downstream catchments on the overall EW lifecycle. Significance StatementEnhanced rock weathering (EW) has emerged as a promising long-term carbon dioxide removal (CDR) method with potential soil and crop co-benefits. However, its impact on river chemistry and the potential loss of captured CO2 during river transport is unclear. We have developed a dynamic river network model to evaluate EW's effects on North American watersheds. Following EW application to a preliminary example set of locations, many rivers show low carbon loss and limited carbonate saturation state change. However, regional variation exists, emphasizing the need for deployment-specific evaluation and further development of process-based models of stream/river carbon cycling. This study provides a step forward in the development of tools for quantifying the impact of EW on river systems, supporting the potential for large-scale EW, and informing CDR strategy decisions and carbon markets.

show abstract

Section: Tracking River Responses To Ew Using the Drn Modelmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraining carbon loss from rivers following terrestrial enhanced rock weathering

Zhang,

Reinhard,

Liu

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to speed up this natural process, crushed reactive rocks (e.g., basalt), minerals (e.g., olivine and wollastonite) or other alkaline materials (e.g., slag, cement kiln dust, or returned concrete) can be applied in agricultural settings (Renforth et al, 2015;Taylor et al, 2016;Renforth, 2019;Amann et al, 2020;Haque et al, 2020;Kelland et al, 2020). Based on generalist model predictions, EW has a global CDR potential in the range of 0.5-4 Gt CO 2 per year (Fuss et al, 2018;Beerling et al, 2020;IPCC, 2022), which can be optimized through the choice of feedstock and weathering environment (Beerling et al, 2020;Cipolla et al, 2021Cipolla et al, , 2022Baek et al, 2023;Deng et al, 2023;Haque et al, 2023;Jerden et al, 2024). Such a magnitude of CDR can meaningfully contribute to national and international CDR targets (Taylor et al, 2016;Beerling et al, 2020;Kantzas et al, 2022;Smith et al, 2023) with water and energy requirements lower than most industrial removal technologies (Lefebvre et al, 2019;Eufrasio et al, 2022), no required change in land use, all while providing important benefits for crops and communities (Manning and Theodoro, 2020;Swoboda et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of measurement for quantification of carbon dioxide removal by enhanced weathering in soil

Clarkson,

Larkin,

Swoboda

et al. 2024

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All pathways which limit global temperature rise to <2°C above pre-industrial temperatures now require carbon dioxide removal (CDR) in addition to rapid greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Novel and durable CDR strategies need to rapidly scale over the next few decades in order to reach Paris Agreement Targets. Terrestrial enhanced weathering (EW) involves the acceleration of natural weathering processes via the deployment of crushed rock feedstocks, typically Ca- and Mg-rich silicates, in soils. While models predict this has the potential to remove multiple gigatonnes of CO2 annually, as an open-system pathway, the measurement (monitoring), reporting, and verification (MRV) of carbon removal and storage is challenging. Here we provide a review of the current literature showing the state-of-play of different methods for monitoring EW. We focus on geochemical characterization of weathering processes at the weathering site itself, acknowledging that the final storage of carbon is largely in the oceans, with potential losses occurring during transfer. There are two main approaches for measuring EW, one focused on solid phase measurements, including exchangeable phases, and the other on the aqueous phase. Additionally, gas phase measurements have been employed to understand CO2 fluxes, but can be dominated by short-term organic carbon cycling. The approaches we review are grounded in established literature from the natural environment, but implementing these approaches for EW CDR quantification has strengths and limitations. The complexity inherent in open-system CDR pathways is navigable through surplus measurement strategies and well-designed experiments, which we highlight are critical in the early stage of the EW CDR industry.

show abstract

“…In order to speed up this natural process, crushed reactive rocks (e.g., basalt and dunite), minerals (e.g., olivine and wollastonite) or other alkaline materials (e.g., slag, cement kiln dust, or returned concrete) can be applied in agricultural settings (Renforth et al, 2015;Taylor et al, 2016;Renforth, 2019;Amann et al, 2020;Haque et al, 2020;Kelland et al, 2020;Knapp and Tipper, 2022). Based on generalist model predictions, EW has a global CDR potential in the range of 0.5-4 Gt CO 2 per year (Fuss et al, 2018;Beerling et al, 2020;IPCC, 2022), which can be optimized through the choice of feedstock and weathering environment (Beerling et al, 2020;Cipolla et al, 2021Cipolla et al, , 2022Baek et al, 2023;Haque et al, 2023). Such a magnitude of CDR can meaningfully contribute to national and international CDR targets (Taylor et al, 2016;Beerling et al, 2020;Kantzas et al, 2022;Smith et al, 2023) with water and energy requirements lower than most industrial removal technologies (Eufrasio et al, 2022), no required change in land use, all while providing important benefits for crops and communities (Manning and Theodoro, 2020;Swoboda et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Measurement for Quantification of Carbon Dioxide Removal by Enhanced Weathering in Soil

Clarkson,

Larkin,

Swoboda

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All pathways which limit global temperature rise to <2oC above pre-industrial temperatures now require carbon dioxide removal (CDR) in addition to rapid greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Novel and durable CDR strategies need to rapidly scale over the next few decades in order to reach Paris Agreement Targets. Terrestrial enhanced weathering (EW) involves the acceleration of natural weathering processes via the deployment of crushed rock feedstocks, typically Ca- and Mg-rich silicates, in soils. While models predict this has the potential to remove multiple gigatonnes of CO2 annually, as an open-system pathway, the measurement (monitoring), reporting, and verification (MRV) of carbon removal and storage is challenging. Here we provide a review of the current literature showing the state-of-play of different methods for monitoring EW. We focus on geochemical characterization of weathering processes at the weathering site itself, acknowledging that the final storage of carbon is largely in the oceans, with potential losses occurring during transfer. There are two main approaches for measuring EW, one focused on solid phase measurements, including exchangeable phases, and the other on the aqueous phase. Additionally, gas phase measurements have been employed to understand CO2 fluxes, but can be dominated by short-term organic carbon cycling. We stress that, although there is complexity in tracing EW CDR in the natural field environment, established literature validates existing approaches, and each approach has strengths and limitations. The complexity inherent in open-system CDR pathways is navigable through surplus measurement strategies and well designed experiments, which we highlight are critical in the early stage of the EW CDR industry.

show abstract

Impact of Climate on the Global Capacity for Enhanced Rock Weathering on Croplands

Cited by 13 publications

References 54 publications

Constraining carbon loss from rivers following terrestrial enhanced rock weathering

Constraining carbon loss from rivers following terrestrial enhanced rock weathering

A review of measurement for quantification of carbon dioxide removal by enhanced weathering in soil

A Review of Measurement for Quantification of Carbon Dioxide Removal by Enhanced Weathering in Soil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About