Recueil de données sur les fausses solutions climatiques

The report documents the negative impacts and risks associated with various geoengineering 'false solutions,' including carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), direct air capture (DAC), solar radiation management (SRM), and marine geoengineering. It provides specific examples of project failures, environmental hazards, and social injustices across Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and Latin America, asserting that these technologies often perpetuate the fossil fuel economy rather than solving the climate crisis.

• Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage (CCUS) are described as unproven technologies that risk leaking toxic CO2, polluting aquifers, and increasing ocean acidification.
• Several high-profile CCS projects have failed to meet their targets: the Al Reyadah project in the UAE avoided less than a third of emissions by 2022, and Chevron's Gorgon project in Australia failed to meet its 80% capture target for 2021, requiring the purchase of 5.23 megatonnes of offsets.
• Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is criticized for creating land competition between energy and food production, threatening global food sovereignty, and causing biodiversity loss through the use of primary forests.
• Direct Air Capture (DAC) is characterized as energy- and water-intensive, with limited proven scale; for instance, 27 global installations combined capture less than 10,000 tonnes of CO2 per year.
• Solar Radiation Management (SRM) techniques, such as Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), are viewed as having unacceptable risks, including the potential for 'termination shock' (a sudden temperature rise if the system fails) and the disruption of tropical rain patterns.
• Marine geoengineering, including Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE), risks disrupting the base of the marine food chain (phytoplankton) and introducing toxic metals like nickel and chrome into coastal ecosystems.
• The report highlights the use of 'Enhanced Oil Recovery' (EOR) as a way for the fossil fuel industry to use captured carbon to extract more oil, thereby canceling out the climate benefits of the capture process.
• Specific instances of lack of consent and transparency are noted, such as the SCoPEx project in Sweden and the 'Make Sunsets' experiments in Mexico, both of which faced strong opposition from local and indigenous communities.

APA

Masson, L., Shaw, S., & Fandel, G. (2024). Recueil de données sur les fausses solutions climatiques. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-FR-WEB-09.17-1.pdf

Chicago

Masson, Lise, Sara Shaw, and Ghislaine Fandel. Recueil de données sur les fausses solutions climatiques. Friends of the Earth International, 2024. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-FR-WEB-09.17-1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Masson |first1=Lise |last2=Shaw |first2=Sara |last3=Fandel |first3=Ghislaine |title=Recueil de données sur les fausses solutions climatiques |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=August 2024 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PART2-Bank-of-evidence-Report-FR-WEB-09.17-1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{masson2024recueil, author = {Masson, Lise and Shaw, Sara and Fandel, Ghislaine}, title = {{Recueil de données sur les fausses solutions climatiques}}, 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-FR-WEB-09.17-1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }