Bank of evidence on false climate solutions

The report provides a 'Bank of Evidence' detailing the failures and risks of geoengineering, categorized into carbon removal and solar radiation management. It highlights specific project failures in carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Australia, the UAE, and Canada, and critiques the ecological risks of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air capture (DAC). The document also examines speculative solar radiation management (SRM) experiments in the US, UK, and Mexico, and various marine geoengineering attempts, asserting that these 'false solutions' often benefit the fossil fuel industry while threatening biodiversity and human rights.

• Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) are described as unproven technologies that are energy-intensive, expensive, and carry risks of toxic CO2 leakage which could lead to aquifer pollution or increased ocean acidification.
• Several high-profile CCS projects have failed to meet their targets: Chevron's Gorgon project in Australia failed its storage and emission targets by approximately 50% in its first five years, and the Al Reyadah project in the UAE captured less than a third of a steel plant's emissions in 2022.
• Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is critiqued for creating competition for land between fuel and food production, threatening global food sovereignty, and causing environmental damage through the sourcing of biomass.
• Direct Air Capture (DAC) is characterized as a costly and energy-intensive distraction; for example, the Mammoth project in Iceland may operate at ten times the cost generally considered financially viable.
• Solar Radiation Management (SRM) technologies, such as Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), are viewed as speculative and risky. Mexico implemented a ban on solar geoengineering after the US startup Make Sunsets conducted unauthorized experiments in Baja California.
• Marine geoengineering, including Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE), poses risks to marine food chains and ecosystems. For instance, the use of olivine in OAE may introduce toxic metals like nickel and chromium into coastal environments.
• The report argues that many geoengineering projects are used to prolong the fossil fuel economy, specifically through Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), where captured CO2 is used to extract more oil from depleted fields.

APA

Masson, L., Shaw, S., & Fandel, G. (2024). Bank of evidence on false climate solutions. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-ENG-WEB-2.pdf

Chicago

Masson, Lise, Sara Shaw, and Ghislaine Fandel. Bank of evidence on false climate solutions. Friends of the Earth International, 2024. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-ENG-WEB-2.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Masson |first1=Lise |last2=Shaw |first2=Sara |last3=Fandel |first3=Ghislaine |title=Bank of evidence on false climate solutions |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=August 2024 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-ENG-WEB-2.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{masson2024bank, author = {Masson, Lise and Shaw, Sara and Fandel, Ghislaine}, title = {{Bank of evidence on false climate solutions}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2024}, month = aug, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-ENG-WEB-2.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }