Trillions in Market Opportunities and Economic, Social, Environmental Benefits – “CLIMATE RESTORATION DINNER” AT THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM DAVOS 2020


Market Report Dr. Sanjeev Khagram:

Foundation for Climate Restoration, Sept 2019 pg. 5.

“We still need to shift from fossil fuels to clean energy. We still need to adapt to rising sea levels and an overheated planet … Climate Restoration is not a substitute for mitigation (preventing or reducing greenhouse gas emissions) or adaptation (preventing or reducing damage from global warming)—but a timely and much-needed addition to them.”

About Enhanced Weathering (Quote):


Five “conventional path- ways” and five “non-conventional pathways” were analyzed in a comprehensive recent review of “The technological and economic prospects for CO2 utilization and removal”, published in Nature on November 6, 2019. This rigorous analysis finds that:

“Dependent on a multitude of technological, policy, and economic factors that remain unresolved, each of the conventional pathways—chemicals, fuels, micro-algae, building materials and CO2-EOR— might utilize around 0.5 Gt CO2/yr or more in 2050. We also estimate that between 0.2 and 3.2 Gt CO2/yr could be removed and stored in the lithosphere or in the biosphere for centuries or more. The five non-conventional utilization pathways that we review here are BECCS, enhanced weathering, forestry techniques, land management practices, and biochar. Previous reviews have shown that these path- ways offer substantial CO2 removal potential: a recent substantive scoping review gives values of 0.5 to 3.6 Gt CO2/yr for afforestation/reforestation, 2.3 to 5.3 Gt CO2/yr for land management, 0.3 to 2 Gt CO2/yr for biochar, and 0.5 to 5 Gt CO2/yr for BECCS. Enhanced weathering offers a removal potential of 2 to 4 Gt CO2/yr at costs of around $200 per tonne of CO2. Not all of this potential involves utilization of carbon dioxide resulting in economic value, but the approximate scale of CO2 utilized that is described below could be considerable. The break even costs per tonne of CO2 utilized that we estimate here are low and are frequently negative.”

See the whole report from Thunderbird School of Global management of the Arizona State University: