Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “carbon removal”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS)

To achieve the ambitious net-zero emission goal by 2050, it is vital to explore practical approaches for removing carbon dioxide from the air. One promising method is Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS). BiCRS combines the natural ability of plants to convert carbon dioxide into biomass with human engineering to store the biomass, or derived products (char), belowground where it won't decompose. By securely storing these materials underground, we can trap the carbon dioxide absorbed by the plants during their growth, thus aiding in carbon removal from the atmosphere. BiCRS not only addresses carbon emissions but also has co-benefits such as wildfire risk reduction by utilizing forest residues. It is essential to establish best practices to ensure accurate measurements of net carbon dioxide removed by BiCRS for policymakers, businesses and communities. Presently, there is a lack of consistent methods for calculating these removals, considering variables like plant type, storage conditions, and conditions for converting the biomass to other products for storage like char. This project develops guidelines for monitoring and reporting BiCRS activities, offering a dependable framework for measuring carbon dioxide removal, enabling adoption of transparent BiCRS approaches for making significant contributions to reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

biomass carbon removal and storage↗
DOE OSTI2026

Nonenergy Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS): Assessing Durability of Nongaseous Carbon Products Across Terrestrial Storage Fates

Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage, or BiCRS, pathways use plants or algae that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis and store it underground or in long-lived products. While some BiCRS approaches generate an energy product, all BiCRS approaches generate a carbon product. A new subset of BiCRS approaches focus on the storage of these raw or converted carbon products for generation of carbon credits. However, the durability of these approaches is highly variable as carbon products vary widely in their “form” and the conditions of their “fate.” We organize our thinking about carbon products and their durability around these two primary axes. The durability of carbon product “forms” is mediated by chemical recalcitrance and ranges substantially across agricultural residues, municipal solid waste, woody biomass, and nongaseous products of thermochemical conversion (e.g., biochars and bio-oils). Meanwhile, terrestrial storage “fates” vary in the mechanism employed to stall decay, including surface storage, dry storage, shallow anoxic storage, and deep or geologic anoxic storage (or injection). Each mechanism has different implications for suitability with different feedstock forms as well as long-term risks. We present a framework for assessing durability of solid or liquid raw and conversion carbon products under terrestrial storage fates, highlighting knowns, unknowns, and research priorities moving forward.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Carbon Capture and Storage for Small-to-Medium Biorefineries: Promising Carbon Removal Solution with Economic Challenges

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) integrated with biomass-based fuel production can provide cost-effective biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) and produce high-value bioproducts, such as sustainable aviation fuels. To accelerate BiCRS deployment, it is crucial to quantify the costs of CCS integration, particularly for small- and medium-scale biorefineries that are representative of early-stage deployment. Existing studies tend to focus on plant sizes that are orders-of-magnitude larger than early-stage installations, possibly underestimating CCS costs for small-to-medium biorefineries. We show that the capture, transport, and storage costs to maximize CO 2 removal from a 526 dry tonne per day (tpd) biomass gasification plant (largest existing size) could be 13–47% higher than costs for a typical modeled plant size (2000 dry tpd). The higher cost estimates are driven by less favorable economies of scale and realistic assumptions about the availability of affordable CO 2 transport infrastructure with both drivers broadly applicable to other BiCRS technologies. Compliance and voluntary carbon markets could incentivize biorefinery CCS, but both carry a high degree of uncertainty. In conclusion, these findings highlight that sufficient and reliable financial mechanisms would be essential to unlocking the full CO 2 removal potential of biorefineries and facilitating BiCRS scale-up.

Biological transport↗
DOE OSTI2024

Trade-offs in land-based carbon removal measures under 1.5 °C and 2 °C futures

Land-based carbon removals, specifically afforestation/reforestation and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), vary widely in 1.5 °C and 2 °C scenarios generated by integrated assessment models. Because underlying drivers are difficult to assess, we use a well-known integrated assessment model, GCAM, to demonstrate that land-based carbon removals are sensitive to the strength and scope of land-based mitigation policies. We find that while cumulative afforestation/reforestation and BECCS deployment are inversely related, they are both typically part of cost-effective mitigation pathways, with forestry options deployed earlier. While the CO 2 removal intensity (removal per unit land) of BECCS is typically higher than afforestation/reforestation over long time horizons, the BECCS removal intensity is sensitive to feedstock and technology choices whereas the afforestation/reforestation removal intensity is sensitive to land policy choices. Finally, we find a generally positive relationship between agricultural prices and removal effectiveness of land-based mitigation, suggesting that some trade-offs may be difficult to avoid.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Biomass carbon removal can help sustainable aviation fuels achieve on-time arrival

Biofuels, including sustainable aviation and marine fuels, and biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) are often viewed as potentially competing pathways for advancing climate and energy goals. Their comparative economic, environmental, and temporal advantages remain debated. Rather than identifying a “best-use” for biomass, we show that the relative economic advantages of BiCRS versus biofuels exist along a continuum shaped by energy- and decarbonization-focused market conditions. These pathways need not be adversarial: BiCRS can enable, rather than displace, future biofuel deployment. While the lignocellulosic biofuel sector continues to face barriers associated with underdeveloped supply chains and technologies that have not yet been commercialized at scale, emerging BiCRS approaches are comparatively feedstock-flexible, rapidly deployable, and responsive to carbon removal markets. Early BiCRS deployment can help establish reliable biomass supply chains, reducing investment risk for future lignocellulosic biorefineries. By easing initial supply chain constraints, BiCRS can serve as a practical stepping stone toward meeting both near-term carbon removal needs and long-term sustainable fuel objectives under uncertain future market and policy conditions.

bioenvironmental engineering↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Removal Accounting for a Sustainable Future: Distributing CO 2 Flows in Multiservice Systems

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) systems are an integral part of sustainable pathways limiting global warming to less than 2.0 °C. When the sole purpose of CDR is capturing and storing atmospheric CO 2 , carbon registries offer detailed procedures to calculate the carbon removal credits. However, the registries do not address how to distribute CO 2 flows when CDR provides additional services. Standardized, transparent rules for distributing CO 2 flows among CDR services are required for the formation of efficient private and public carbon markets. The lack of such rules could result in double counting if those reductions are allocated to more than one service, decreasing the trustworthiness of carbon removal credits or deterring the delivery of an additional low-carbon service, thus limiting the economic viability and deployment of CDR. We examine allocation rules in carbon registries and carbon accounting guidelines, including their life cycle assessment (LCA) principles. We evaluate physical (mass-based) and non-physical (economic) allocation methods using a generic CDR system and find both to be unworkable. We then develop a mass balance (MB) approach which can reliably allocate captured and stored carbon (CSC) between carbon removal credits and other services based on the value CO 2 removal in those markets. This practical approach to allocation can be used in a transparent way to provide flexibility that would allow CDR services to capture the value of the multiple services they provide and, through this, promote the deployment of these sustainable alternatives.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Filer City Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Net-Negative Study

NorthStar Clean Energy Company (NorthStar) conducted the Filer City Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Net-Negative Study to develop a conceptual design and cost estimate for retrofitting the TES Filer City Station with post-combustion carbon capture technology in Mainstee Michigan. The Filer City BiCRS Net-Negative Study allowed NorthStar and team to confirm the commercial feasibility of a post-combustion carbon capture system applied to biomass-fired boilers. At the time of the study, there were no operating facilities in the world with carbon capture applied to flue gas from woody biomass as proposed for Filer City. Due to the solvent-agnostic nature of B&W’s SolveBright™ technology, the team determined that multiple amines, both traditional and proprietary, would be capable of 95% CO 2 capture efficiency with the steam available from Filer City’s existing boilers after modifications to burn 100% biomass. Based on the cost estimates produced, NorthStar can now confirm the Filer City BiCRS Project is economically viable with a combination of tax credits available from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and high-quality Carbon Dioxide Removal Credits sold on the Voluntary Carbon Market. The Filer City BiCRS project is uniquely positioned to become one of the first projects to capture and sequester large volumes of CO 2 from a biogenic source, removing existing CO 2 from the atmosphere. The unlimited version of the Filer City Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Net-Negative Study Final Technical Report is attached.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2025

Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Variables Matrices

The Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Variables Matrices provide insights related to measured, monitored, reported and verified (MMRV) components (variables) across a BiCRS value chain. Suggested variable values and components to be measured with literature references and context obtained from industry and scientists are provided for several biomass sources, conversion routes and storage scenarios. The Variables Matrices are meant to support life cycle assessment and MMRV efforts for BiCRS projects. These variables and insights may need to be updated in the future as additional information, scientific advancements, and data become available (Version 1 issued in 2025).

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Responsibility for emissions and mitigation capability should guide use of carbon removal offsets

M Gidden conducted this work prior to joining PNNL and no DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE, OTHER DOE, OTHER FEDERAL, OR PNNL OVERHEAD FUNDING is being used. Stabilizing and then drawing down global temperature requires achieving net-negative CO2 emissions globally. Carbon removal is needed to offset “hard-to-abate” sectors that remain sources of emissions at net-zero and beyond. We argue the use of scarce carbon removal resources should be guided by the principles enshrined in the Paris Agreement.

Gidden, Matthew↗
DOE OSTI2026

Quantifying atmospheric carbon removal at pulp and paper mills: a life cycle assessment across system boundaries

The pulp and paper industry is a promising yet underexplored platform for large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) due to its use of biogenic feedstocks and production of concentrated CO 2 emissions from point sources. This study presents the first comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) of retrofitting an amine-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) system into a representative virgin kraft pulp and paper mill in the Southeastern U.S. We evaluate carbon removal across five system configurations, applying both static and dynamic LCA methods under multiple functional units: CO 2 captured, biomass input, and paper output. Results show that CCS retrofits can convert a conventional mill from a net emitter into a net carbon sink, with total removal efficiencies from 17% to 92% (metric tonnes of CO 2 removed per metric tonne of CO 2 available for removal under selected boundary conditions). When carbon removal is normalized to the quantity of biogenic CO 2 captured—a narrow, gate-to-gate system boundary that considers only CCS facility emissions—removal efficiencies reached as high as 92%. The use of such narrow boundaries aligns with precedents in traditional LCA methodology, where gate-to-gate assessments are commonly applied to isolate process-level performance and allocate emissions accordingly, providing a consistent basis for comparison across technologies. Under broader cradle-to-grave boundaries—which begin tracking carbon at the point of its physical removal from the atmosphere via photosynthesis in the forest, and extend to include upstream forest operations, mill-wide emissions, and downstream product decomposition—efficiencies declined, ranging from 17% to 46% under static assumptions and dropping to 12% when accounting for dynamic biogenic carbon fluxes over time. These results underscore how system boundary definitions influence reported outcomes, while also illustrating the complementary roles of narrow and broad perspectives for different decision-making contexts.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Biomass and Bioproduct Data Table

The Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Biomass and Bioproduct Data Table was generated using data from biomass and bioproducts (i.e., biochar, pyrolysis oil) supplied by BiCRS project developers. Data was obtained via analytical characterization methodologies listed in the document at the National Laboratory of the Rockies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Net-Zero Lime Kiln and Carbon Removal Facility

The final scientific/technical report for DE-FE0032248. The Project Objective for DE-FE0032248, Net-Zero Lime Kiln and Carbon Removal Facility, was to execute and complete the initial design of a commercial-scale, advanced carbon capture system that separates CO2 with at least 95% capture efficiency from process streams at the Carmeuse Kentucky (KY) lime plant that will be retrofitted to utilize sustainably sourced biomass (SSB) alone or in combination with natural gas, and/or coal, with at least a 20-year available feedstock supply and remaining asset life.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Maximizing Marine Carbon Removal by Coupling Electrochemical and Biological Methods

Integrated development of emerging marine decarbonization strategies offers the possibility of lowering CO2 removal costs and enabling their widespread deployment. In this study we examine the feasibility and benefits of coupling electrochemical and biological marine carbon removal strategies. Bipolar membrane electrodialysis (BPMED) is used to generate acid and alkalinity from seawater and electricity, and the alkalinity is returned to the ocean for indirect CO2 removal from the atmosphere, but the acid stream is a waste product. Considering the large-scale of CO2 removal necessary, the acid storage, neutralization, and disposal have prohibitive costs and carbon footprint. Here we investigate the feasibility to valorize the acid stream to enhance the growth and CO2 uptake through photosynthesis in the fast-growing marine phytoplankter Picochlorum celeri. When added to active algae cultures, the BPMED-generated acidified seawater alters the carbonate-bicarbonate equilibrium thereby increasing the bioavailability of CO2 and the observed growth rates. Additions of up to 2 mM H+ from BPMED effluent streams increased algal productivity up to 3-fold. A high-level analysis conducted based on experimental data to estimate the potential of sequestered CO2 emissions when compared to conventional commercial means of acid utilization or disposal, is estimated to be ~30 kgCO2 / kgacid. Through further development and optimization in terms of choice of algal species, growth conditions, acid addition rates, etc. the combined electrochemical-biological approach has the potential to achieve higher net CO2 removal.

carbon dioxide, marine, marine algae↗
DOE OSTI2022

Nitrogen and Carbon Removal Capacity by Farmed Kelp Alaria marginata and Saccharina latissima Varies by Species

An increasing body of evidence shows that seaweeds, including kelp, can be used as a tool to neutralize or remove excess nutrients and metals from the water column. Here we report on a preliminary field assessment showing potential nutrient and carbon removal differences in sugar kelp and ribbon kelp grown in common gardens. Seawater and tissue samples were collected systematically from two farms in Alaska. Results show differences between the %N and %C content between Alaria marginata and Saccharina latissima. Results also show that tissue nitrogen in ribbon kelp varies sharply due to nitrogen availability in the water column. In contrast, the percentage of tissue N in sugar kelp remains comparatively stable. Our outcomes provide insight into potential differences in nutrient removal and harvest timing for different kelp species.

Umanzor, Schery (ORCID:0000000238124565)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) Counterfactual Decision Tree

Counterfactual is the term used to describe a "business-as-usual" scenario which used as a baseline to compare against a new project, allowing the calculation of net impacts for a life cycle analysis (LCA). The choice of counterfactual is critical for determining the results from LCA and must be carefully justified to ensure a fair and accurate comparison. Using forest residues as an example, this decision tree illustrates decision points to be considered for sustainable biomass sourcing and provides a framework for estimating the carbon emissions or storage under the "business-as-usual” scenarios for biomass otherwise destined for use in Biomass for Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) projects.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Technical Track on Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS): Mapping bioresources, phase 1 - Consistency check comparing Mission Innovation’s Data Visualization Tool for Bioresources and the Clean Energy Ministerial Biofuture Initiative Global Biomass data accessible via the US Department of Energy’s Bioenergy Knowledge Discovery Framework (KDF)

The Mission Innovation (MI) Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Mission, Technical Track on Biomass Carbon Dioxide Removal and Storage (BiCRS), has produced a biomass resource database for its members. In parallel, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) developed the International Feedstock Reporting data portal—herein referred to as the CEM Biofuture-KDF data—on behalf of the Clean Energy Ministerial Biofuture Initiative (CEM Biofuture), as a specific task under Biofuture’s 2024–25 Action Plan. This work was conducted at the request of CEM Biofuture and funded by the U.S. Department of Energy in support of that initiative, and it is hosted within DOE’s Knowledge Discovery Framework (KDF).

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Deployment expectations of multi-gigatonne scale carbon removal could have adverse impacts on Asia’s energy-water-land nexus

Abstract Existing studies indicate that future global carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) removal (CDR) efforts could largely be concentrated in Asia. However, there is limited understanding of how individual Asian countries and regions will respond to varying and uncertain scales of future CDR concerning their energy-land-water system. We address this gap by modeling various levels of CDR-reliant pathways under climate change ambitions in Asia. We find that high CDR reliance leads to residual fossil fuel and industry emissions of about 8 Gigatonnes CO 2 yr −1 (GtCO 2 yr −1 ) by 2050, compared to less than 1 GtCO 2 yr −1 under moderate-to-low CDR reliance. Moreover, expectations of multi-gigatonne CDR could delay the achievement of domestic net zero CO 2 emissions for several Asian countries and regions, and lead to higher land allocation and fertilizer demand for bioenergy crop cultivation. Here, we show that Asian countries and regions should prioritize emission reduction strategies while capitalizing on the advantages of carbon removal when it is most viable.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Applying equity principles leads to higher carbon removal obligations in Canada

Despite net-zero pledges, consensus on national responsibilities for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies is lacking. Here, we use integrated assessment modeling to examine equity-informed estimates of Canada’s remaining carbon budgets, exploring CDR’s role at net-zero and beyond. Gigaton-scale CDR efforts post-2050 are needed to address Canada’s carbon debt under various burden-sharing principles. Cumulative negative emissions (2050-2100) could increase from 7.5 GtCO 2 in the Net-Zero scenario to 20.3 GtCO 2 in equity-informed scenarios. By 2100, a CDR portfolio, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, direct air capture, and enhanced weathering could contribute up to ~500 MtCO 2 /year of removals. The projected average CDR growth rates, 2.8%-16%/year, align with the historical adoption rates of ammonia synthesis and biomass consumption in Canada, underscoring the importance of drawing lessons from past successes. Socio-economic and technological sensitivity analysis highlights that, despite variations in the role of individual CDR technologies, CDR remains essential for Canada’s post-net-zero commitments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗