Advances in Carbon Management

Technologies-Carbon Removal,
Renewable and Nuclear Energy,
Volume 1 1st Edition Subhas Sikdar
(Editor)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-carbon-management-technologies-carbo
n-removal-renewable-and-nuclear-energy-volume-1-1st-edition-subhas-sikdar-editor/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Low Carbon Energy in Africa and Latin America Renewable

Technologies Natural Gas and Nuclear Energy 1st Edition
Ricardo Guerrero-Lemus

https://textbookfull.com/product/low-carbon-energy-in-africa-and-
latin-america-renewable-technologies-natural-gas-and-nuclear-
energy-1st-edition-ricardo-guerrero-lemus/

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

https://textbookfull.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-
loucas/

Energy Technology 2016 Carbon Dioxide Management and

Other Technologies 1st Edition Li Li

https://textbookfull.com/product/energy-technology-2016-carbon-
dioxide-management-and-other-technologies-1st-edition-li-li/

Energy Technology 2018 : Carbon Dioxide Management and

Other Technologies 1st Edition Ziqi Sun

https://textbookfull.com/product/energy-technology-2018-carbon-
dioxide-management-and-other-technologies-1st-edition-ziqi-sun/
Low Carbon Energy Supply Technologies and Systems 1st
Edition Atul Sharma

https://textbookfull.com/product/low-carbon-energy-supply-
technologies-and-systems-1st-edition-atul-sharma/

Energy Technology 2017: Carbon Dioxide Management and

Other Technologies 1st Edition Lei Zhang Et Al. (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/energy-technology-2017-carbon-
dioxide-management-and-other-technologies-1st-edition-lei-zhang-
et-al-eds/

Carbon Management Technologies and Trends in

Mediterranean Ecosystems 1st Edition Sabit Er■ahin

https://textbookfull.com/product/carbon-management-technologies-
and-trends-in-mediterranean-ecosystems-1st-edition-sabit-ersahin/

Carbon Nanomaterials for Electrochemical Energy

Technologies: Fundamentals and Applications 1st Edition
Shuhui Sun

https://textbookfull.com/product/carbon-nanomaterials-for-
electrochemical-energy-technologies-fundamentals-and-
applications-1st-edition-shuhui-sun/

Renewable Energy and its Innovative Technologies

Proceedings of ICEMIT 2017 Volume 1 Jayeeta
Chattopadhyay

https://textbookfull.com/product/renewable-energy-and-its-
innovative-technologies-proceedings-of-
icemit-2017-volume-1-jayeeta-chattopadhyay/
Advances in Carbon
Management Technologies
Volume 1
Carbon Removal, Renewable and Nuclear Energy
Editors
Subhas K Sikdar
Retired, Cincinnati, OH, USA
formerly Associate Director for Science
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
US Environment Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

Frank Princiotta
Retired, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
formerly Director, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
US Environment Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA

p,
p,
A SCIENCE PUBLISHERS BOOK
A SCIENCE PUBLISHERS BOOK
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742

© 2020 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Version Date: 20200210

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-429-24360-8 (e-book)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been
made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the
validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the
copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to
publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let
us know so we may rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted,
or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, includ-
ing photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written
permission from the publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com
(http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,
MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety
of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment
has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at

http://www.taylorandfrancis.com

and the CRC Press Web site at

http://www.crcpress.com
 Dedication

To the fond memories of my mother, Biva; to my elder sister, Ratna; and my daughter, Manjorie; all of
whom have deeply affected my professional and social attitude.
—Subhas Sikdar

To my children Thomas, Elizabeth and John. They, their generation and generations to follow, will reap
from seeds we sow. If humanity doesn’t get its act together in a hurry, climate change will drastically
degrade the habitability of the home planet for them and their fellow species.
—Frank Princiotta
 Preface

Average global temperatures, computed from measurements on land, ocean, and via satellites, have
steadily increased since the Industrial Revolution, the time we started extracting and burning fossil fuels.
Keeping pace with this, greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, principally CO2, have been accumulating
monotonically. Experts have developed climate models which suggest that in the absence of near-term
dramatic emission reductions, warming over time could yield impacts jeopardizing life on Earth as we
know it. To avoid such potential catastrophic impacts, experts, including the U.S. National Academy
of Sciences, have prescribed replacement of fossil fuels, such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas with
renewable and non-carbon fuels, principally solar, wind, and nuclear. This aspiration has been called the
principal grand challenge of this century. This book, Advances in Carbon Management Technologies,
was designed to take a stock of the state-of-the-science development along this journey.
Advances in carbon Management Technologies comprises 43 chapters, in 2 volumes, contributed
by experts from all over the world. Volume 1 of the book, containing 22 chapters, discusses the status
of technologies capable of yielding substantial reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from major
combustion sources. Such technologies include renewable energy sources that can replace fossil fuels, and
technologies to capture CO2 after fossil fuel combustion or directly from the atmosphere, with subsequent
permanent long-term storage. The introductory chapter emphasizes the gravity of the issues related to
greenhouse gas emission-global temperature correlation, the state of the art of key technologies and the
necessary emission reductions needed to meet international warming targets. Section 1 deals with global
challenges associated with key fossil fuel mitigation technologies, including removing CO2 from the
atmosphere, and emission measurements. Section 2 presents technological choices for coal, petroleum,
and natural gas for the purpose of reducing carbon footprints associated with the utilization of such fuels.
Section 3 deals with promising contributions of alternatives to fossil fuels, such as hydropower, nuclear,
solar photovoltaics, and wind.
Volume 2 of Advances in Carbon Management Technologies has 21 chapters. It presents the
introductory chapter again, for framing the challenges that confront the proposed solutions discussed in
this volume. Section 1 presents various ways biomass and biomass wastes can be manipulated to provide
a low-carbon footprint of the generation of power, heat and co-products, and of recovery and reuse of
biomass wastes for beneficial purposes. Section 2 provides potential carbon management solutions in
urban and manufacturing environments. This section also provides state-of the-art of battery technologies
for the transportation sector. The chapters in section 3 deals with electricity and the grid, and how
decarbonization can be practiced in the electricity sector.
The overall topic of advances in carbon management is too broad to be covered in a book of this
size. It was not intended to cover every possible aspect that is relevant to the topic. Attempts were made,
however, to highlight the most important issues of decarbonization from technological viewpoints.
Over the years carbon intensity of products and processes has decreased, but the proportion of energy
derived from fossil fuels has been stubbornly stuck at about 80%. This has occurred despite very rapid
development of renewable fuels, because at the same time the use of fossil fuels has also increased.
Thus, the challenges are truly daunting. It is hoped that the technology choices provided here will show
the myriad ways that solutions will evolve. While policy decisions are the driving forces for technology
development, the book was not designed to cover policy solutions.
 Preface v

As editors, we are thankful to the contributing authors for their great efforts in delivering the
chapters in a timely fashion. We commend the chapter reviewers for great engagement with the topics
and for providing constructive comments in each case. Without the utmost cooperation of the authors and
reviewers we would not be able to meet the deadline to produce this timely book. Throughout the formative
stages of this development, publisher’s representative, Mr. Vijay Primlani, has provided encouragement
and assisted us in every way possible to complete the project. We owe our gratitude to him.
Subhas K Sikdar
Cincinnati, Ohio
Frank Princiotta
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
 Contents

Dedication iii
Preface iv
Introduction: What Key Low-Carbon Technologies are Needed to Meet Serious Climate viii
Mitigation Targets and What is their Status?
Frank Princiotta

Section 1. Global and Regional Views of Carbon Management

1. Removing Carbon Dioxide from the Air to Stabilise the Climate 3
Richard C Darton and Aidong Yang
2. Low-Carbon Technologies in Global Energy Markets 23
Yoram Krozer
3. Carbon Management: Forest Conservation and Management 40
Grace Ding and Nguyen Thuy
4. Reducing Carbon Footprint of Products (CFP) in the Value Chain 59
Annik Magerholm Fet and Arron Wilde Tippett
5. Significance of Greenhouse Gas Measurement for Carbon Management Technologies 73
James R Whetstone

Section 2. Fossil Sector: Coal/Petroleum/Natural Gas

6. Carbon Policies for Reducing Emissions in Power Plants through an 119
Optimization Framework
Aurora del Carmen Munguía-López and José María Ponce-Ortega
7. Carbon Mitigation in the Power Sector: Challenges and Opportunities 132
Bruce Rising
8. The Environmental Impact of Implementing CO2 Capture Process in Power 147
Plants: Effect of Type of Fuel and Energy Demand
Carolina Mora-Morales, Juan Pablo Chargoy-Amador, Nelly Ramírez-Corona,
Eduardo Sánchez-Ramírez and Juan Gabriel Segovia-Hernández
9. Systems Integration Approaches to Monetizing CO2 via Integration of Shale Gas 163
Processing and Industrial Waste Mineralization
Jared Enriquez and Mahmoud M El-Halwagi
10. Energy-Water-CO2 Nexus of Fossil Fuel Based Power Generation 184
Kyuha Lee and Bhavik R Bakshi
 Contents vii

11. Natural Gas Reforming to Industrial Gas and Chemicals Using Chemical Looping 203
Dawei Wang, Yitao Zhang, Fanhe Kong, L-S Fan and Andrew Tong
12. Alternative Pathways for CO2 Utilization via Dry Reforming of Methane 253
Mohamed S Challiwala, Shaik Afzal, Hanif A Choudhury, Debalina Sengupta,
Mahmoud M El-Halwagi and Nimir O Elbashir
13. Ranking Negative Emissions Technology Options under Uncertainty 273
Raymond R Tan, Elvin Michael R Almario, Kathleen B Aviso, Jose B Cruz, Jr and
Michael Angelo B Promentilla
14. Carbon Management in the CO2-Rich Natural Gas to Energy Supply-Chain 286
Ofélia de Queiroz Fernandes Araújo, Stefano Ferrari Interlenghi and
José Luiz de Medeiros
15. Chemicals from Coal: A Smart Choice 323
Bipin Vora
16. Optimal Planning of Biomass Co-Firing Networks with Biochar-Based 344
Carbon Sequestration
KB Aviso, JLG San Juan, CL Sy and RR Tan
17. Trends in Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions 359
H Christopher Frey

Section 3. Wind/Solar/Hydro/Nuclear
18. Nuclear Energy, the Largest Source of CO2 Free Energy: Issues and Solutions 379
Anthony J Baratta
19. Concentrated Solar Energy-Driven Multi-Generation Systems Based 390
on the Organic Rankine Cycle Technology
Nishith B Desai and Fredrik Haglind
20. Solar Photovoltaic Technologies and Systems 407
JN Roy
21. Reducing the Carbon Footprint of Wind Energy: What Can Be Learned 425
from Life-Cycle Studies?
Melanie Sattler
22. Hydropower: A Low-Carbon Power Source 433
Ånund Killingtveit
Index 451
 INTRODUCTION
What Key Low-Carbon Technologies are Needed
to Meet Serious Climate Mitigation Targets
and What is their Status?
Frank Princiotta

1. Introduction
Since the industrial revolution, humanity has emitted Gigaton quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2) and
other greenhouse gases. Figure 1 (NASA GISS, 2019) shows that the warming that has occurred since
1880 has been in the order of 1.1 degrees centigrade higher than pre-industrial levels. As a result of
manmade emissions, carbon dioxide concentrations have dramatically spiked to unprecedented levels
when viewed from an 800,000-year perspective. Current concentrations of carbon dioxide are now
approximately 410 PPM, relative to the 280-ppm level just before the industrial revolution. Note that in
the absence of a serious global emission reduction program, CO2 concentrations are projected to rise as
high as 1000 ppm later this century.
Figure 2 compares actual warming (NASA GISS, 2019) to model projections. The model used was
the Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Induced Climate Change (MAGICC), using middle
of the road model assumptions and assuming a fossil fuel intensive emission trajectory (A1FI). It is
important to note the close correlation of the actual warming relative to the model projections. As can
be seen, if we continue on this fossil fuel intensive emission path and the model continues to accurately
predict warming, the planet would be 1.5 ºC warmer by 2035 and 2 ºC warmer by 2045. These warming
levels are particularly relevant since the international community has set a warming target of no greater
than 2 ºC and optimally below 1.5 ºC by the end of this century. If we were to continue on our current
fossil fuel intensive trajectory, 2100 warming is projected to be greater than 4 ºC and rising.
To put the significance of such warming in perspective, Figure 3 was generated based on data from a
reconstruction of global temperature for the last 11,300 years (Marcot, 2013), with more recent warming
data and model projections included. When current and projected warming is viewed from this long-term
perspective, it becomes clear that humankind has, in just 240 years, fundamentally changed the heat
transfer characteristics of the planet, with even more dramatic change projected. Note that, as of 2017,
warming was about 0.2 ºC warmer than any time in the last 11,300 years. If we continue on our fossil
fuel intensive emission trajectory, warming is projected to be in the order of 3.5 ºC greater than any time
over this period.

Retired Research Director, USEPA, 100 Longwood Drive, Chapel Hill, NC 27514.
Email: fprinciotta@msn.com
 Introduction ix

Figure 1. Warming that has occurred since industrial revolution.

4.600
4.400
4.200
4.000
3.800
3.600
3.400
3.200
3.000
2.800
2.600
2.400
2.200
2.000
1.800
1.600
1.400
1.200
1.000
0.800
0.600
0.400
0.200
0.000
–0.200
–0.400
1800
1805
1810
1815
1820
1825
1830
1835
1840
1845
1850
1855
1860
1865
1870
1875
1880
1885
1890
1895
1900
1905
1910
1915
1920
1925
1930
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2055
2060
2065
2070
2075
2080
2085
2090
2095
2100

Model Projection MAGICC LIVE AlFl Scenario

Actual Warming from pre-industrial per NOAA 2018
Figure 2. Actual global warming compared to a model projection.

2. Only Emissions of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) Can Account for the Warming
Experienced Since the Industrial Revolution
As discussed, it is clear that the planet has warmed considerably since the industrial revolution. A
legitimate question Is whether such warming is a result of human emissions of greenhouse gases or the
result of natural factors, such as solar variations and volcanic eruptions. Such eruptions can cool the
planet after the reflective particles are driven into the stratosphere, while the planet could warm back
up after the particles have settled out of the atmosphere. Figure 4 (USEPA, 2017) illustrates that when
x Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

g
rmin
8ºF 0 wa 4.4 C
cted 210

Temperature Change (Degrees Fahrenheit)

Proje

Relative To 1961−1990 Mean

6ºF 3.3 C
Reconstructed Temperature
Via paleoclimatology and Recent data
Projected Temperature

4ºF 2.2 C

2ºF 1.1 C
2017 warming

0ºF 0C

10000 BC 8000 BC 6000 BC 4000 BC 2000 BC 0 2000 AD

Year
Source: Science & ClimateProgress.org

Figure 3. Temperature change (relative to the 1961–1990 mean) over past 11,300 years (in blue) plus projected warming this
century on humanity’s current emissions path (in red).

Separating Human and Natural Influences on Climate

2.0
Global Temperature Change (oF)

Observations
1.5
Natural and Human Factors
Natural Factors Only
1.0

0.5

−0.5

−1.0
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Year
Figure 4. Only GHG emissions can explain warming since 1900.

comparing actual warming to warming predicted by models when only natural factors are considered
versus when one accounts for the greenhouse gas impacts, it is clear that human GHG emissions have
provided the driving force for the observed warming. Note that Figure 2 reinforces this conclusion, since
model warming projections, assuming only GHG emission impacts, yield results consistent with the
actual warming.

3. The Heat Added by Anthropogenic Emissions of GHGs is Already

Yielding Major Impacts, with More to Come
It is not possible to change the heat balance of the earth so substantially, as humanity has done by adding
large quantities of GHGs, without major impacts. It has been calculated (Skeptical Science, 2019) that
 Introduction xi

Figure 5. The impacts of greenhouse gas emissions.

the added heat associated with elevated levels of GHGs in the atmosphere since 1998 is equivalent to the
detonation of 2.74 billion Hiroshima size atomic bombs. Currently, heat equivalent to four such bomb
detonations is being added each second. Ten bombs per second of heat is projected to be added later
this century, in the absence of serious global mitigation efforts. Figure 5 (Cook, 2017) illustrates the
impacts of all this heat being added to the atmosphere. More heat means both higher temperatures in the
atmosphere as well as greater rates of evaporation, yielding more flooding rains. The impacts of higher
temperatures and greater evaporation rates are depicted in Figure 5. They include: More intensive heat
waves and drought, potentially threatened food supplies, greater risk of wild fires, melting ice yielding
seawater rise and more intense weather events, such as more dangerous cyclones. The ocean’s ecosystems
are also at risk due to a combination of ocean warming and acidification, since about 90% of all the heat
and 25% of the CO2 ends up in the oceans. CO2 absorbed in the ocean generates carbonic acid which
increases the ocean’s acidity.
As Figure 2 illustrated, we face the prospects of warming at the 4 °C level later this century. Warren
(2010) summarized the implications of a 4 °C warmer world as follows: “Enormous adaptation challenges
in the agricultural sector, with large areas of cropland becoming unsuitable for cultivation. … large losses
in biodiversity, forests, coastal wetlands… supported by an acidified and potentially dysfunctional marine
ecosystem. Drought and desertification would be widespread, with large numbers of people experiencing
increased water stress. … Human and natural systems would be subject to increasing levels of agricultural
pests and diseases, and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.”

4. There is the Danger of a Runaway Situation if Warming occurs Too

Rapidly and Activates Tipping Points Associated with Amplifying
Feedbacks
It is important to note, that current projection models do not account for the possibility that there could
be accelerating warming due to “tipping points” associated with driving forces that could yield a point in
time when the global climate changes from one stable state to another, a threshold which reaches a point
of “no return” that can change the planet irreversibly. Such points could cascade, yielding a “hothouse
Earth”. Figure 6 (an updated/upgraded figure from Climate Change Knowledge (2014)) illustrates the
xii Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Fossil Fuels a Major Source

Carbon dioxide Methane Nitrous oxide Ground level ozone Halocarbons
Black carbon soot Reflective air pollutants

ol
co
Global warming
Ocean
acidification
Heat water vapor

Melting Antarctica & Extreme weather

Greenland Land Ice Global climate change
& variability
Ocean warming Heat waves
Droughts
Melting summer Rain storms
Arctic sea Ice Wildfires Floods
Thawing Hurricanes & cyclones
permafrost

Amplifying feedbacks

Figure 6. Amplifying feedbacks could yield “runaway” warming.

relationship between GHG emissions and potential impacts with a focus on Amplifying Feedbacks.
Examples of such feedbacks, that if cascaded could contribute to such a runaway state include:
• Accelerated Melting of Arctic sea ice and Antarctica/Greenland land ice (such melting would
decrease Earth’s reflectivity, allowing more heat to be absorbed by the atmosphere).
• Melting of permafrost in Siberia, Canada and Alaska (large additional source of CO2 & CH4 not
accounted for in models).
• Ocean warming and acidification along with increasing number and intensity of wildfires (these
would have the effect of weakening CO2 sinks, absorption on land and in the ocean, yielding an
acceleration of growth of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere).
A recent study (Steffen, 2018) examined this issue and concluded that potential planetary thresholds
yielding accelerating and potentially irreversible warming could occur at a temperature rise as low as
2.0 °C above preindustrial levels. They concluded that limiting warming to a maximum of 1.5 °C would
dramatically lower the risk of this potentially catastrophic instability.
Although not discussed in the study, it follows that warming in the vicinity of 3–4 °C would
substantially raise the probability of such tipping points, yielding a “hothouse earth”.

5. Growing Global Emissions, the Result of a Growing Population

Demanding an Expanding Array of Resource Intensive Goods and
Services
The dramatic growth in GHG emissions since the industrial revolution are driven by two key drivers.
First, world population has been growing relentlessly. World population is now at 7.5 billion, has tripled
since 1950, and is expected to grow to over 9 billion by 2050. Second, in developed nations, people
have expanded their list of “needs” to include personal transportation, residences with energy-intensive
heating, cooling, and lighting, a diet heavily oriented toward meat consumption, and an ever-growing
array of consumer goods and services. Developing countries are moving in the same direction, albeit at
earlier stages. World population has been growing annually at about 1.2% and CO2 emissions at 2.3%
over the last 17 years.
Figure 7 illustrates the factors responsible for the challenges to long term sustainability with a focus
on climate change, the most serious sustainability threat. The middle of the figure indicates that these
human needs are met by means of a large array of industrial, agricultural, and energy technologies and
 Introduction xiii

Challenges to Long Term Sustainability

CO2 Air, Water, Land Earth & Societal
contaminants Impacts
Human “Needs”
- food Ocean, Forest,
- shelter Ecosystem
- transportation Technologies & Pre-climate degradation
Practices Change Impacts
- medical
- ind. production Species Extinctions
- consumer goods Demand Human Total Resource depletion
per - agriculture
- clean air & population Demand Air & water quality
capita - energy
water Water scarcity
production
- healthy Health impacts
eco-systems
Food scarcity
Fossil H2O Geological Infrastructure
Fuels Materials damage
Mass population
displacement
Social/Cultural Mitigation Technology Extreme Weather
Opportunities Mitigation Events
-Population stabilization
Opportunities Climate Change Impacts
-Vegetarian Diets -Renewables, CCS, nuclear
-Mandated Recycling -Low C autos & buildings

Figure 7. Drivers yielding GHG emissions and the two key mitigation approaches.

practices. Although, there are a multitude of sustainability impacts associated with these “technologies
and practices”, independent of climate change. The major threats are shown color coded in two categories:
Earth and Societal impacts. These include, degradation of air and water quality, depletion of minerals and
fresh water supplies and ecosystem damage. Unique climate change impacts are listed on the right side of
the figure and include: Potential food scarcity, infrastructure damage, mass population displacement and
extreme and damaging weather events. As indicated by the red return arrows, in addition to such unique
impacts, climate change has the potential to exacerbate impacts associated with other human activities,
such as ocean and forest degradation. The bottom of the figure indicates that there are two classes of
mitigation opportunities. The most commonly considered approach is replacing/upgrading current
technologies and practices. Another, less discussed, but potentially important if technology modifications
alone are insufficient to avoid serious climate impacts, would be to modify social and cultural behavior
toward energy-efficient and resource-intensive lifestyles.

6. Each Country Has a Unique GHG Emission Trajectory and Mitigation

Challenge
When one examines GHG emissions on a country by country basis, fundamental differences in emission
characteristics and mitigation challenges are observed. Table 1 (generated based on databases from
Global Carbon Atlas (2018)) summarizes CO2 emission data for the 14 largest emitters in 2017. They
are positioned in the order of the magnitude of their emissions. China, the EU and the U.S. are by far the
largest emitters. The developed countries are identified by the normal font, while those in various stages
of economic transition are in the bold font. Let us briefly discuss the situation in key developed countries
and then in developing countries. At this point it should be noted that the IPCC (2013) has concluded that,
in order to have a chance of limiting warming to no greater than 2 °C, global per capita emissions should
be between 1.1 and 2.2 t/person in 2050 and zero in 2100.
China is by far the largest emitter, passing the U.S. in 2006. It is considered somewhere between
a developing and a developed country. Their 17-year emission growth rate at 6.6% is unmatched by
any other country. They have rapidly transformed from a low-end developing country to a country with
unprecedented economic growth via rapid urbanization, industrialization (supported by an unprecedented
power generation expansion, primarily based on coal), and major growth of their on-road transportation
fleet. Population growth at 0.6% has been only a minor factor in influencing their rapid emission growth.
Their per capita emission has grown dramatically to 7 t/p and still growing.
 Table 1. CO2 emission data for countries with the greatest emissions in 2017.

Country 2017 Emissions GT CO2 2017 per Capita Emissions 2017 Population millions 2000 to 2017 Annual Emission 2000 to 2017 Annual Population
tonnes/person Growth Rate Growth Rate
China 9863 7.0 1409 6.6% 0.6%
USA 5184 16.0 324 –0.9% 0.8%
EU 3544 7.0 507 –1.0% 0.2%
India 2446 1.8 1359 5.2% 1.5%
Russia 1716 12.0 143 0.8% –0.1%
Japan 1207 9.5 127 –0.3% 0.0%
Iran 672 8.3 81 3.6% 1.2%
Saudi Arabia 627 19.0 33 4.5% 2.7%
S. Korea 616 12.0 51 1.9% 0.5%
Canada 592 16.0 37 0.2% 1.0%
Brazil 481 2.3 209 2.3% 1.0%
xiv Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Indonesia 475 1.8 264 3.5% 1.3%

S. Africa 456 8.0 57 1.1% 1.3%
Australia 408 17.0 24 0.9% 1.4%
Rest of World 7866 2.6 2995 3.7% 2.2%
Total 36153 4.7 7620 2.3% 1.3%
IPCC: Per Capita target for 2 °C maximum warming = 1.1 to 2.2 in 2050 and near Zero in 2100.
 Introduction xv

The U.S. and the EU are both highly developed with similar standards of living, yet the EU’s per
capita emissions are less than half those of the U.S. The EU has been the most conscientious regarding
minimizing GHG emissions, has had a culture of treating energy conservation seriously, and uses less
electricity per capita, in part because of very high electric rates. They have also has been leaders in
utilizing wind and solar power. As a more population dense area with less dependence on large low-
efficiency cars and trucks, their transportation emissions are much lower as well. Finally, the very low
population growth has also been a factor. However, for both the EU and especially the US, reducing per
capita emissions to the 1.1 to 2.2 level by 2050 will be a monumental challenge.
The developing world is in a fundamentally different situation. Per Table 1, countries in this category
would be include India, Iran, Brazil, Indonesia and many African, South American and Asian countries
in the “Rest of the world” designation. It is estimated that over 4 billion people fall in this category. They
generally have similar characteristics: Low standards of living, modest per capita incomes, high birth
rates and relatively low per capita emissions. The challenge for developing countries is to improve their
economies while at the same time lowering or at least not raising their per capita emissions. India is a
particularly important case since its population is close to that of China, with a fast-growing economy
and a major increase in emissions (and per capita emissions) in recent years. This is not the direction this
sector of the world’s economy should be heading if we are serious about avoiding unacceptable climate
change.

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions are Associated with All Energy, Industrial

and Agricultural/Land Use Sectors
In order to appreciate the scope of the mitigation challenge, it is important to understand the relationships
between: The energy, industrial and agricultural/land use sectors, the related activities that are needed for
the desired societal end uses (“needs”) and the resulting GHG emissions. Figure 8 (WRI, 2007) quantifies
these relationships for the world as of 2005, the last year such a chart was published. An example of these
relationships follows: If the end use/activity is heating, cooling and lighting residential buildings, the
relevant sectors are Electricity and Other Fuel Combustion. This is the case since some residences are
heated with electricity (heat pumps or resistance heating) and others via direct combustion of a fuel, such
as natural gas. So, both electricity and fuel combustion sectors contribute to CO2 emissions associated
with residential buildings, as indicated in Figure 8.
As can be seen, key end uses that drive energy-related emissions include road travel, residential and
commercial building cooling, heating and lighting and the production of chemicals, cement, and iron
& steel needed for production of goods. The net result are huge emissions of CO2, most of which are
associated with the combustion of coal, oil and natural gas. Also, the agricultural sector is responsible
for the majority of emitted methane, the second most important greenhouse gas. Land use change was
another important contributor to raising CO2 concentrations, however less active deforestation in recent
years has decreased the importance of this sector. Note that in 2005, 77% of the anthropogenic warming
was associated with CO2, with methane and N2O contributing 15% and 7%, respectively. Also note, that
the term CO2 equivalent [CO2(e)] emissions, is the amount of CO2 which would have the equivalent
global warming impact when accounting for CO2 plus the other GHG gases. For 2005 that number
globally was 44 Gt(e).

8. Major Emission Mitigation from All Sectors and GHGs is Required

Immediately in Order to Have a Chance of Meeting International Targets
In order to have a chance of limiting warming to between 1.5 and 2.0 ºC per the international community’s
stated target, it will be necessary to drastically reduce emissions as soon as possible. Figures 9 and 10
have been generated in order to help quantify this monumental challenge. The previously mentioned
MAGICC model was used. Warming projected should be considered as “best guess” values, considering
that there are uncertainties in such values, especially for long term projections. Both figures assess the
xvi Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Sector End Use/Activity Gas

Road 10.5%
Transportation 14.3%
Air 1.7%
Rail, Ship, & Other Transport 2.5%

Residential Buildings 10.2%

Y

Electricity & Heat 24.9%

G

Commercial Buildings 6.3%

R

Unallocated Fuel Combustion 3.8%

Iron & Steel 4.0%

N E

Aluminium/Non-Ferrous Metals 1.2%

Carbon
Machinery
Pre-Press & Printing
1.0%
1.15% Dioxide
Other Fuel 8.6% Food & Tobacco 1.0%
(CO2) 77%
Combustion Chemicals 4.1%
E

Cement 5.0%

Industry 14.7% Other Industry 7.0%

T&D Losses 2.2%

Coal Mining 1.3%
Fugitive Emissions 4.0% Oil/Gas Extraction, 6.4%
Industrial Processes 4.3% Refining & Processing

(Tropics only)
Deforestation 11.3% HFCs,
Land Use Change 12.2% Afforestation –0.4% PFCs,
Harvest/Management 1.3%
SF6 1%
Agricultural Energy Use 1.4%
Methane
Agriculture Soils 5.2%
(CH4) 15%
Agriculture 13.8% Livestock & Manure 5.4%

Rice Cultivation 1.5%

Other Agriculture 1.7% Nitrous Oxide
Waste 3.2% Landfills 1.7% (N2O) 7%
Wastewater, Other Waste 1.5%

WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE

Figure 8. Global Greenhouse Gas emissions in 2005 by sector, end use and gas.

warming implications of six emission scenarios; Figure 9 shows the assumed emission scenarios in Gt
CO2 and Figure 10 shows the projected warming all the way to 2100, associated with these emission
scenarios:
1) A business as usual case that assumes continued reliance on fossil fuels with no serious mitigation
reductions for methane and nitrous oxide, the two other key GHGs.
2) A scenario consistent with the 2015 Paris Agreement where most countries “promised” significant
but relatively modest emission reductions.
3) A serious CO2 global emission reduction program with near term emission stabilization and 3%
annual emission reductions, starting in 2035 and continuing for 65 years.
4) Scenario 3 above, with the addition of a complimentary CH4 and N2O emission reduction program,
starting in 2035 as well.
5) Scenario 4 above, but with the addition of a major Direct Atmospheric Capture (DAC) program to
remove CO2 from the atmosphere, starting in 2030 and continuing for 70 years.
6) Scenario 5 above, but with CO2, methane and N2O mitigation starting ten years earlier, in 2025, and
maintained for 75 years.
As can be seen, with 3% annual CO2 mitigation starting in 2035, it will be difficult to limit warming
to below 2 ºC. The addition of CH4 and N2O mitigation significantly reduces the warming, but limiting
warming to 2 ºC still appears unlikely. When one adds a major Direct Air Capture (DAC) component
to the mitigation strategy it appears that limiting warming to 2 ºC may be achievable. Finally, if we
start CO2, CH4 and N2O emission reductions ten years earlier, in 2025, and again supplement with a
major DAC complimentary program, further warming reduction is achieved, raising the probability that
warming would be limited to 2 ºC. It is worth noting that none of these options appear to be able to limit
warming to 1.5 ºC, a likely unattainable target. DAC technology involves the construction of massive
chemical plants designed to remove CO2 directly from the atmosphere.
 Introduction xvii

35 Six Scenarios: BAU, Paris Accord & 4 Mitigation Options, Gt CO2 2100
Warming
Fossil Energy Intensive Scenario (A1Fl) 4.4 C
30
Paris Treaty National Promises

Start in 2035 Annual Reduction 3%; CO2 WITH &

25 WITHOUT 1.5% annual CH4 and N2O Mitigation
Start in 2035 Annual Reduction 3%; CO2 with 1.5%
CH4 & N2O Annual Reduction PLUS DAC
20 Start in 2025 Annual Reduction 3% CO2 & 1.5%
CH4 & N2O Reduction PLUS DAC
3.3 C
15

10

5
2.7 C CO2 only &
2.3 C all GHGs
0 2.0 C
1.85 C
−5
1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

2095

2100
Figure 9. Six GHG emission scenarios, Gt CO2 per year.

5.00
6 Warming Scenarios: BAU, Paris Promises, 3% CO2 2035, 3% All GHGs 2035, All GHGs

2035 + DAC, All GHGs 2025 + DAC, Degree C

4.50

Actual Warming per NOAA from pre-industrial

4.00 Fossil Energy Intensive Scenario (A1Fl)
Paris Treaty National Promises
Start in 2035 Annual Reduction −3%; CO2 ONLY
3.50 Start in 2035 Annual Reduction −3%; CO2 PLUS −1.5% M&N
Start in 2035 Annual Reduction 3%; CO2 PLUS 1.5% M&N + DAC
Start in 2025 Annual Reduction 3%; CO2 PLUS 1.5% M&N + DAC
3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Figure 10. Projected warming associated with six GHG emission scenarios, Degree Celsius.

It should be noted that DAC technology is at a very early stage of development and implementation
costs are likely to be very high per ton of carbon captured. Keith (2018) has analyzed a chemical sorbent
process, aqueous sorbent KOH coupled to a calcium caustic sorbent recovery loop, and estimated capture
costs at $94 to $232 per ton. Options 5 and 6 described above, assume DAC capture would start in 2030
with progressively greater annual removal quantities for a total of 37 Gt for the 70-year mitigation period.
xviii Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Given this quantity, the estimated cost of such DAC capture would be between $1.3 to $2.5 trillion per
year or $72 and $178 trillion over the 70-year period! This study did not include the required costs
for permanent storage of the CO2, probably in deep underground saline aquifers, which will likely add
trillions of US$ to the cost of such an enterprise.

9. Emerging Technologies Will need to be Available and Extensively Utilized

if Global Warming Target Levels Stand a Chance of Being Achieved
If the international community ultimately sets sufficiently aggressive emission requirements in order
to minimize the worst consequences of climate change, affordable, practical low-carbon technologies
would need to be commercially available within the next ten years. Of particular importance would
be Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies, advanced nuclear generators, low-cost renewable
generation with energy storage capability, efficient buildings and low-emission vehicles. Also, given the
importance of methane and N2O emissions (see Figures 10 and 11), the international community must
agree on emission reductions for these pollutants as soon as possible as well. For methane, leakage from
oil, gas and coal operations are particularly important. Agriculture operations are important sources for
CO2, methane and N2O.
Figure 11, derived from IEA (2016), quantifies the amount of CO2 that would have to be mitigated
by technology, by sector, between now and 2050 in order to have a chance of limiting warming to 2 ºC.
As can be seen, all sectors require major CO2 reductions.
Tables 2 to 5 have been generated with the aim of summarizing for key technologies by sector:
The current state of the art, issues that could limit near term utilization and research, development and
demonstration priorities.
Note that for Table 2 a column has been added which quantifies what IEA (2016) has determined
would be the potential mitigation impact of each power generation technology, in terms of Gt of CO2
mitigated between now and 2050. It is worth noting that, in recent years, solar and wind technologies have
seen their capital costs reduced substantially along with cost reductions in storage technologies needed
if these technologies can continue to generate power when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t
blow. On the other hand, CCS technology development has stumbled. Princiotta (2017) summarized
the state of the art of CCS technology as of 2016 and concluded that, despite an active demonstration
program initiated 10 years ago, 43 projects have been shut down due to overruns yielding unacceptably
high costs, degradation of power plant efficiency and serious capture and storage technical difficulties.
Such technology is particularly important for relatively new coal and natural gas-fired power generators,

Renewables CCS Fuel Switching

Energy Efficiency Nuclear
350

300
Nuclear, 70
250 5
4

200 CCS, 60

150

100 175
75.0 112

50 38
61.6
18
25 CCS, 22 16.5
0 4.5

Power Transport Industry Buildings

Figure 11. Cumulative Gt CO2 reductions needed by sector per technology in 2050 in order to limit warming to 2 ºC.
 Table 2. Power generation low-carbon technologies.

Technology IEA 2050 carbon Current state of the art Issues Technology RD&D needs
emission reduction,
Gt; 2 ºC goal
Carbon Capture and 3.7 Early commercialization for High capital costs, 20–30% conversion efficiency High: Demos on next generation technology on
Storage coal with many demos having degradation, complexity and potential reliability a variety of units burning coals & natural gas;
cost overrun and operating concerns; Underground Storage: Cost, safety, enhanced Underground Storage program with long
issues efficacy and permanency issues term demos evaluating large number of geological
formations
Solar-Photovoltaic 3.7 First generation commercial Solar resource intermittent and variable, although High: Research needed to develop and demo
and Concentrating costs have been reduced further efficiency/cost cells with higher efficiency, and lower capital
(renewable) reductions needed costs; develop/commercialize affordable storage
technology
Wind Power 2.6 Commercial (on-shore) Costs very dependent on strength of wind source, Medium: Higher efficiencies, off-shore
(renewable) large turbines visually obtrusive, intermittent demonstrations. Affordable storage technology
power source
Nuclear Power- 2.6 Commercial BWR, PWR; Deployment targeted by 2030 with a focus on High: Demonstrations of key advanced
advanced & next Developmental: Generation lower cost, minimal waste, enhanced safety and technologies with complimentary research on
generation III+ and IV: e.g., Pebble Bed resistance to proliferation important issues; commercialization of fusion
Modular Reactor technology could be transformational, might be
possible, mid to late century
Biomass as fuel 1.0 Early Commercial Important to assess true renewability of biomass Medium: Biomass/IGCC would enhance efficiency
gasified or co-fired source, limited to 20% when co-fired with coal and CO2 benefit; also, genetic engineering to
with coal (renewable) enhance biomass plantations
Fuel Switching coal 0.2 Commercial (w/o CCS) Effectiveness of CCS on natural gas generators; High: Hydro fracturing environmental mgt., CCS
to gas CH4 emissions during hydro fracturing could demos needed, especially in the U.S.
reduce GHG reduction benefit
Smart Grids Not calculated, but Early Commercial, with active Telecommunications cost high, security concerns High: Enhanced smart grid modeling, reduce
supports renewables research focused on next and questions regarding consumer acceptance/ telecommunication cost component, demonstrate
generation technologies participation effectiveness in maximizing solar and wind power
production in overall mix
Introduction xix
 Table 3. Mobile source technologies.

Technology IEA number of light duty Current state of the art Issues Technology RD&D needs
vehicles in 2050, millions
Electric & Hybrid 91 Early commercial For electric plugs-in, mileage (battery) High: Battery improvements in storage capability, cost and
Gasoline and limitations; charging durations and high lifetimes important
Diesel purchase prices; benefits greater if power
from low-carbon sources
Fuel Cell Electric 27 Developmental Fuel cell costs and fuel cell stack life; also, H2 High: Breakthrough R,D&D needed to develop
Vehicle production and need for fueling infrastructure competitive, long lived fuel cell stack; viable H2 production
and storage, with a focus on safety, needed
Ethanol from 0 Developmental Important to assess true renewability of High: Breakthrough RD&D needed to develop economical
cellulosic biomass biomass source; inability to convert wide technology capable of generating large quantities;
sources, e.g., wood range of biomass sources with competitive especially critical for the aircraft industry
production costs
Biodiesel & 0 Developmental Important to assess true renewability of High: Breakthrough RD&D needed to develop economical
other fuels from biomass source; inability to convert wide technology capable of generating large quantities;
biomass; thermo range of biomass sources with competitive especially critical for the aircraft industry
chemical processes production costs
xx Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Technology
CO2 Capture and Storage
(IEA ETP 2015 projects 1.6 Gt
mitigation in 2050)
Motor Systems
Enhanced energy efficiency:
Existing basic material
processes
Steam systems (required for
many industries)
Materials/Product Efficiency
Cogeneration (combined heat
and power)
Enhanced energy efficiency:
New basic material processes
Fuel Substitution in Basic
Materials Production
Feedstock Substitution in key
industries
Table 4. Industrial technologies.
Current state of the art Issues RD&D needs
Early development Applicability limited to large energy-intensive industries, High: Major program with long term demos
including fuel transformation processes; key questions: Cost, evaluating large number of geological
safety, efficacy formations to evaluate efficacy, cost and safety
Commercial For most industries not a major cost; lack of expertise for some Medium: Lower costs and higher efficiencies
industries desirable
Commercial Developing countries can have low energy efficiency due to lack Low
of incentive and/or expertise
Commercial For most industries not a major cost; lack of expertise for some Low
industries
First generation: commercial Little incentive to minimize the CO2 “content” of materials and Medium: Conduct life cycle analyses of
products; life cycle analyses required key materials and products with the aim of
minimizing CO2 “content”
Commercial Limited by electric grid access that would allow the ability to Low
feed electricity back to grid; also high capital costs
Developmental to Near- New, innovative production processes require major RD&D Medium/High: Develop and demonstrate less
commercial depending on and would need reasonable payback to replace more C intensive carbon intensive production processes for key
industry processes industries
Commercial Natural gas substitution for oil and coal can be expensive Low
Commercial Biomass and bioplastics can substitute for petroleum feedstocks Medium: Develop affordable substitute
and products; however, cost high and availability low feedstocks and products based on biomass
Introduction xxi
xxii Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Table 5. Building technologies.

Technology IEA 2050 Current Issues Technology RD&D priority

carbon emission state of the and needs
reduction, Gt; art
2 ºC goal
Enhanced energy mgt. and 2.5 Commercial Lack of incentive, Low/medium priority:
high efficiency building high initial costs, Incremental improvements
envelope: Insulation, long building lifetime to lower cost and enhance
sealants, windows, etc. performance
High efficiency building 0.8 Commercial Lack of incentive, Low/medium priority:
heating and cooling, high initial costs Incremental improvements
including heat pumps to lower cost and enhance
performance
Solar heating and cooling 0.5 First High initial costs, Medium: Focus on
generation availability of low- development of advanced
commercial cost efficient biomass biomass stoves and solar
heating systems heating technology in
developing countries

since it is unlikely that such plants would be prematurely retired in favor of renewable or nuclear plants.
The current generation of nuclear power generation is commercially available but is burdened with high
capital costs, waste disposal issues and serious safety concerns. The March 2011 Fukushima Daichi
nuclear disaster, caused by a severe tsunami, has been responsible for several countries reconsidering
their commitment to future nuclear reactor construction.
Table 3 lists the key mobile source technologies projected to play an important emission reduction
role between now and 2050. Included is a column based on IEA (2016) which projects the number
of light duty vehicles on the road in 2050 for key low-carbon technologies. As can be seen, electric
and hybrid electric gasoline and diesel vehicles are projected to be the most important. Their cost and,
therefore, their market penetration will be heavily dependent on the costs and performance characteristics
of the vehicle storage batteries. Also projected to be important are fuel cell vehicles. These vehicles are
in the early stages of commercialization. Fuel cells generate electricity to power the motor, generally
using oxygen from the air and compressed hydrogen. They are generally classified as zero emission
vehicles since the only effluent is water, However, it is important to account for any carbon emissions
that would be associated with the production of hydrogen. Biomass fueled vehicles are at early stages of
development, but have the potential to be significant low-carbon mobile source options.
Table 4 summarizes key industrial low-carbon technologies. The technology with the greatest change
chance of making the greatest impact in this sector is carbon capture and storage. This technology would
be applicable to major industrial sources of CO2, including cement, iron and steel, oil refining and pulp
and paper operations. Unfortunately, as discussed in the power generation discussion above, serious cost,
reliability and permanent storage issues. Clearly, an enhanced research, development and demonstration
program utilizing the next generation CCS technologies is required.
Table 5 lists key low-carbon building technologies. Emission reduction in this sector depends less
on the development of new technology and more on providing incentives to promote the use of state-of-
the-art technology for retrofitting existing buildings and incorporating in new buildings. For this reason,
priority for research, development and demonstration programs is lower than in the power, mobile source
and industrial sectors.

10. Technology RD&D is Woefully Inadequate

Given the need for dramatic emission reductions required in all economic sectors, it is essential that global
RD&D expenditures are adequate to ensure the availability of high performing low-cost technologies in
the near term. Figure 12 summarizes IEA (2011) analysis of actual versus needed global energy technology
 Introduction xxiii

100
80 Current public spending

60 Current public spending needed low end of range

Current public spending needed high end of range
40
20
0
Advanced Bioenergy CCS Energy Higher Smart Nuclear Solar Wind Totals
Vehicles (power Efficiency Efficiency Grids fission Energy Energy
and (industry) Coal
industry)

Figure 12. IEA analysis comparing actual low-carbon technology RD&D versus required spending, $ billions.

RD&D annual funding for key technologies consistent with reducing global emissions 50% by 2050. This
analysis concludes that actual expenditures are a small fraction of what is required. The total required
funding is estimated at $40–$90 billion per year, whereas actual spending for these key technologies is
estimated to be only $10 billion annually. Although substantial, the $30–$80 billion annual funding gap
is minuscule compared to the $1.7 trillion global military spending in 2017 (CNBC, 2018).

11. Geoengineering Options should be Studied

As previously discussed, meeting the global community’s goal of limiting warming to 1.5–2 ºC will be a
monumental challenge. Given the massive and radical infrastructure change that will be needed in the near
term, meeting such a target may not be possible. It has been suggested that geoengineering options could,
at least in theory, buy us time to make the necessary infrastructure/technology changes to dramatically
reduce global GHG emissions. They have been described as both a delaying tactic or as a possible “last
resort” action to limit catastrophic climate change. Geoengineering measures attempt to compensate for
GHG emissions via two fundamentally distinct approaches: (1) changing Earth’s solar radiation balance
by increasing reflectivity and (2) removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Figure 13 mentions several of the
most discussed geoengineering concepts in both categories. Table 6 compares the characteristics of these
two concepts.
Note that two scenarios in Figures 9 and 10 assumed availability of commercial Direct Air Capture
Technologies to compliment emission reduction efforts. DAC is sometimes referred to as the negative
CO2 emissions option. However, this approach, as well as all the options mentioned in Figure 13, are only

Solar Radiation Management CO2 Removal From Atmosphere

-Low Orbit Space Mirrors

Space

Removal Method Long Term Storage

-Lagrange point solar mirrors
−Direct Air Capture (DAC)
Troposphere Stratosphere

Geological reservoirs, e.g.,

−Aerosol Injection via aircraft −Biomass Energy with Carbon deep saline aquifers
or balloon Capture & Storage
Land

−Reforestation, deforestation &

−Marine cloud\e formation via Build up of forestry biomass
dedicated forests with genetically
cloud condensation injection modified trees

−Fertilization via added iron,

Ocean

−White urban roofs volcanic ash or urea to grow CO2 Deep ocean waters
Land

−Change land use patterns to absorbing phytoplankton

promote enhanced reflectivity
Ocean

−Install floating reflectors or foam

on surface

Figure 13. Solar radiation management and atmospheric CO2 removal geoengineering concepts.
xxiv Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

Table 6. Comparing solar radiation and atmospheric CO2 removal concepts.

Characteristic Carbon dioxide removal proposals Solar radiation management proposals

Do they directly address Yes: Such techniques act as negative No: They utilize reflection of incoming solar
the cause of GHG- CO2 emitters radiation to compensate for heat added by GHGs;
induced climate change? would not mitigate ocean acidification by CO2
Can they intoduce novel No Yes: Effects on stratspheric ozone levels and
risks? deleterious meterological impacts possible
How expensive? Generally at least as expensive as Although costs are very preliminary they appear
emission reduction techniques relatively low re. emission control
How fast would results Would take decades to realize Although still at conceptual stage, results could be
be realized? significant results realized within several years after installation
What level of Major cooperation involving multi- Less cooperation needed re. financial commitments
international cooperation trillion US$ financial commitments but potential societal risks suggest international
would be required? needed agreement before implementation needed
Key feasibility questions Are the processes effective and Are the processes effective with acceptable risks?
affordable?

at a conceptual stage with serious performance, environmental impact and economic issues. Nevertheless,
it is the author’s view that, given the magnitude of the mitigation challenge, such approaches warrant
serious feasibility evaluations, as soon as possible.

14. Conclusions
Humanity has dug itself a very deep hole. To limit the damage, it will take a concerted international effort,
building on the 2015 Paris Accord, to aggressively reduce emissions in all sectors as soon as possible.
Low-carbon technologies will of necessity play a crucial role in this process. It is the goal of this book to
provide an assessment of the status and prospects of key low-carbon technologies.

References
CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/02/global-military-spend-rose-to-1-point-7-trillion-in-2017-arms-watchdog-says.
Cook, J. 2017. Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Skeptical Science, https://www.beforetheflood.com/explore/the-
deniers/fact-climate-change-is-very-very-dangerous/.
Climate Change Knowledge. 2014. http://www.climate-change-knowledge.org/uploads/GHG_pollution_schema.png.
Global Carbon Atlas. 2018. http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/ CO2-emissions.
International Energy Agency: Energy Technology Perspectives 2010 (IEA Publications, Paris, France, 2011).
International Energy Agency: Energy Technology Perspectives 2015 (IEA Publications, Paris, France, 2016).
Keith, D. 2018. A Process for Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere, Joule, Volume 2, August 2018.
Marcot, S. 2013. A reconstruction of regional and global temperature for the past 11,300 years, science. Science 08 Mar 2013:
339(6124): 1198–1201. DOI: 10.1126/science.1228026.
NASA GISS. 2019. Https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/.
Princiotta, F. 2016. We are losing the climate change mitigation challenge, can we recover? MRS Energy & Sustainability,
June, 2016, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/mrs-energy-and-sustainability/article/we-are-losing-the-climate-
change-mitigation-challenge-is-it-too-late-to-recover/7EABEBD608FC3C651FE75931B19E7157/core-reader.
Skeptical Science. 2019. Global Warming at 4 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs Per Second https://4hiroshimas.com/.
Steffen, W. et al. 2018. Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene, 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the USA.
USEPA. 2017. https://www.env-econ.net/2017/01/epa-separating-human-and-natural-influences-on-climate.html.
Warren, R. 2010. The Royal Society, The role of interactions in a world implementing adaptation and mitigation solutions to
climate change. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 2011(369): 233. doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0271 (published November 29, 2010).
World Resources Institute: World Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005 (2006). Available at: http://www.wri.org/resources/
charts-graphs/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-flow-chart (accessed April 9, 2019). Google Scholar.
 Section 1
Global and Regional Views of
Carbon Management
 CHAPTER 1
Removing Carbon Dioxide from the
Air to Stabilise the Climate
Richard C Darton* and Aidong Yang

1. Introduction
The rate at which greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere can be reduced by cutting emissions,
but elevated levels of CO2 will persist for centuries. Climate models show that peak CO2-induced warming
depends mainly on cumulative emissions and not the emission pathway (Matthews, 2018). It is, therefore,
expected to become necessary to remove CO2 from the atmosphere in order to counter unacceptable
climate change later in this century. Negative Emission Technologies (NETs) are the methods proposed
for this. Nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4) mainly emitted by agriculture and industry are also
significant contributors to global warming, but this chapter focuses on carbon dioxide. NETs for CO2
are often termed carbon dioxide removal (CDR). It is a more efficient use of energy to capture carbon
from flue gas than from the air, but even if applied quickly on a vast scale, it is expected that Flue Gas
Capture (FGC) on its own will not be sufficient to meet policy goals—for example, peak warming of
1.5 °C above pre-industrial average temperature, the aspiration agreed at Paris in 2015 (Minx et al.,
2018). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has reported the causes and effects of
global warming in great detail, is clear on the need to apply CDR:
“All pathways that limit global warming to 1.5 °C with limited or no overshoot project the use
of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) on the order of 100–1000 GtCO2 over the 21st century”
(IPCC, 2018).
It is difficult to predict the precise timing and scale of CDR that might be needed, and many emissions
scenarios have been considered by the IPCC. Figure 1 shows a typical scenario to the year 2100, in which
peak warming is limited to 2 °C, and CDR is introduced from 2030 to ramp up to the scale needed. The
ambition here is to draw-down around 810 Gt of atmospheric CO2 (range 440–1020 Gt) by the year
2100 and sequester it somewhere securely (UNEP, 2017). Greater emissions reductions could reduce this
targeted draw-down (IPCC, 2018). Fuss et al. (2018) indicate a total NETs deployment across the 21st
century equivalent to net draw-down of 150–1180 GtCO2 as necessary to meet the 1.5 °C target.
Whilst it is relatively simple to incorporate NETs into climate models, whether they can be applied
at the scale needed or within the time frame assumed remains an open question. The impacts on people
and ecosystems need to be considered, for these will be very large industries. Some NETs rely on well-

Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK.
Email: aidong.yang@eng.ox.ac.uk
* Corresponding author: richard.darton@eng.ox.ac.uk
4 Advances in Carbon Management Technologies, Vol. 1

80

70 al
usu

Greenhouse gas emissions (GtCO2e/year)

60 es s as
B usin
50 Be Gross positive
low Reduced greenhouse gas
40 2º greenhouse gas
C emission CO2 from
30 emissions fossil fuels, industry
and land use changes
20
CO2 methane, N2O and
Other greenhouse gas
10 F-Gases
0 Net-zero emissions
Gross negative
–10 CO2 emissions Net negative
greenhouse gas
–20
emissions
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Figure 1. Emissions scenarios to 2100 (Gt CO2 equivalent) showing the potential need for NETs (UNEP, 2017 - Figure 7.2).

known and proven technologies, but others still require a significant amount of research and development
(Nemet etFigure 1. Emissions
al., 2018). scenarios
Moreover, to 2100
recognising the(Gt CO2 equivalent)
objective showing
of removing the potential
greenhouse gases need
from for
the air
raises questions, such as how it will
NETs. UNEP, 2017, Figure 7.2 be paid for and managed. At the very least, NETs will compete with
other desirable activities for resources and investment. Conjuring these industries into existence and then
operating them for, say, a century, with the objective of managing the global climate, is an undertaking
unlike any previously attempted.
It is important to distinguish between methods of capturing carbon dioxide from flue gas or other
waste gases (Carbon Capture and Storage – CCS), and carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere
(CDR) followed by storage. Both CCS and CDR are responses to our failure to curb emissions of
greenhouse gases sufficiently, but they have different characteristics:
a) CCS is a means of reducing emissions by using a process to capture carbon dioxide before it is
released into the atmosphere, and storing the captured CO2 securely. CCS is intended to reduce
emissions particularly from large stationary sources of CO2—power plants burning fossil fuel, cement
factories, chemical plants and the like. Capturing CO2 from distributed sources like motor cars,
aeroplanes and agriculture would be more difficult to do, and is not really envisaged. Deploying CCS
will slow the global rate of emissions but will not affect the CO2 already present in the atmosphere.
b) CDR takes carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere into secure storage. It does not distinguish between
CO2 arising from natural processes and from man-made emissions. Chemical processes for CDR
need more energy than chemical processes for CCS, because the concentration of CO2 in the air
is very low. Deploying CDR to an increasing extent will first decrease the rate at which CO2 is
accumulating in the atmosphere; then, when the rate of CDR exceeds the rate of CO2 emission
(i.e., net negative CO2 emissions), the atmospheric CO2 concentration will start to fall. When the
rate of CDR equals the rate of emission of CO2 and all other greenhouse gases (in terms of CO2-
equivalence), we will have net-zero emissions. In the scenario of Figure 1, this is projected to occur
around 2090, after which we will have net negative greenhouse gas emissions.
Secure storage of CO2, meaning that it is removed from the atmosphere for a long time, is sometimes
termed “sequestration” and CCS can also be taken to stand for Carbon Capture and Sequestration.
Requirements for storage longevity, monitoring and verification are discussed in section 3.8. Another
phrase sometimes encountered is Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU), describing the manufacture
of products using biomass or captured CO2. The extent to which CCU can be regarded as either CCS or
CDR depends on whether the product offers net long-term storage of CO2—this is discussed in sections
3.7 and 3.8.
In this chapter, we first describe, in section 2, the technologies that might be used to capture CO2
from the atmosphere, and indicate the chemistry involved. In section 3, we review options for storing the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
uses; and that according to the various purposes they are applied,
&c. Therefore, indeed, a Letter-Cutter should have a Forge set up,
as by Numb. 1. But some Letter-Cutters may seem to scorn to use a
Forge, as accounting it too hard Labour, and Ungenteel for
themselves to officiate at. Yet they all well know, that though they
may have a common Black-Smith perform their much and heavy
Work, that many times a Forge of their own at Hand would be very
commodious for them in several accidental little and light Jobs,
which (in a Train of Work) they must meet withal.
But if our Letter-Cutter will have no Forge, yet he must of necessity
accommodate himself with a Vice, Hand-Vice, Hammers, Files,
Small and Fine Files (commonly called Watch-makers Files) of these
he saves all, as they wear out, to smooth and burnish the Sides and
Face of his Letter with, as shall be shewed; Gravers, and Sculpters
of all sorts, an Anvil, or a Stake, an Oyl-stone, &c. And of these,
such as are suitable and sizable to the several Letters he is to Cut.
These, or many of these Tools, being described in Numb. 1. I refer
my Reader thither, and proceed to give an account of some Tools
peculiar to the Letter-Cutter, though not of particular use to the
Common Black-Smith.
Plate 10.
 ¶. 2. Of the Using-File.

This File is about nine or ten Inches long, and three or four Inches
broad, and three quarters of an Inch thick: The two broad sides must
be exactly flat and straight: And the one side is commonly cut with a
Bastard-Cut, the other with a Fine or Smooth Cut. (See Numb. 1.
Fol. 14, 15.) Its use is to Rub a piece of Steel, Iron, or Brass, &c. flat
and straight upon, as shall be shewed hereafter.
In chusing it, you must see it be exactly Flat and Straight all its
Length and Breadth: For if it in any part Belly out, or be Hollow
inwards, what is Rubbed upon it will be Hollow, Rubbing on the
Bellying part; and Bellying, Rubbing on the Hollow part. You must
also see that it be very Hard; and therefore the thickest Using-Files
are likeliest to prove best, because the thin commonly Warp in
Hardning.

¶. 3. Of the Flat-Gage.

The Flat-Gage is described in Plate 10. at A. It is made of a flat piece

of Box, or other Hard Wood. Its Length is three Inches and an half,
its Breadth two Inches and an half, and its Thickness one Inch and
an half. This is on the Flat, first made Square, but afterwards hath
one of its Corners (as h) a little rounded off, that it may the easier
comply with the Ball of the Hand. Out of one of its longest Sides, viz.
that not rounded off, is Cut through the thickness of it an exact
Square, whose one side b f, c g is about an Inch and three quarters
long; and its other side b d, c e about half an Inch long. The Depth of
these Sides and their Angle is exactly Square to the top and bottom
of the upper and under Superficies of the Flat-Gage.
Its Use is to hold a Rod of Steel, or Body of a Mold, &c. exactly
perpendicular to the Flat of the Using-File, that the end of it may rub
upon the Using-File, and be Filed away exactly Square, and that to
the Shank; as shall more at large be shewed in §. 2. ¶. 3.

¶. 4. Of the Sliding-Gage.

The Sliding-Gage is described in Plate 10. at Fig. B. It is a Tool

commonly used by Mathematical Instrument-Makers, and I have
found it of great use in Letter-Cutting, and making of Molds, &c. a a
the Beam, b the Tooth, c c the Sliding Socket, d d d d the Shoulder
of the Socket.
Its Use is to measure and set off Distances between the Sholder and
the Tooth, and to mark it off from the end, or else from the edge of
your Work.
I always use two or three of these Gages, that I need not remove the
Sholder when it is set to a Distance which I may have after-use for;
as shall in Working be shewed more fully.

¶. 5. Of the Face-Gages, marked C in Plate 10.

The Face-Gage is a Square Notch cut with a File into the edge of a
thin Plate of Steel, Iron, or Brass, the thickness of a piece of
common Latton, and the Notch about an English deep. There be
three of these Gages made, for the Letters to be cut on one Body;
but they may be all made upon one thin Plate, the readier to be
found, as at D. As first, for the Long Letters; Secondly, for the
Assending Letters; And Thirdly, for the Short-Letters. The Length of
these several Notches, or Gages, have their Proportions to the Body
they are cut to, and are as follows. We shall imagine (for in Practice
it cannot well be perform’d, unless in very large Bodies) that the
Length of the whole Body is divided into forty and two equal Parts.
The Gage for the Long-Letters are the length of the whole Body, viz.
forty and two equal Parts. The Gage for the Assending Letters,
Roman and Italica, are five Seventh Parts of the Body, viz. thirty
Parts of forty-two, and thirty and three Parts for English Face. The
Gage for the Short-Letters are three Seventh Parts of the whole
Body, viz. eighteen Parts of forty-two for the Roman and Italica, and
twenty two Parts for the English Face.
It may indeed be thought impossible to divide a Body into seven
equal Parts, and much more difficult to divide each of those seven
equal Parts into six equal Parts, which are forty-two, as aforesaid,
especially if the Body be but small; but yet it is possible with curious
Working: For seven thin Spaces may be Cast and Rubb’d to do it.
And for dividing each of the thin Spaces into six equal Parts, you
may Cast and Rub Full Point . to be of the thickness of one thin
Space, and one sixth part of a thin Space: And you may Cast and
Rub : to be the thickness of one thin Space, and two sixth parts of a
thin Space: And you may Cast and Rub , to be the thickness of one
thin Space, and three sixth parts of a thin Space: And you may Cast
and Rub - to be the thickness of one thin Space, and four sixth parts
of a thin Space: And you may Cast and Rub ; to be the thickness of
one thin Space, and five sixth parts of a thin Space.
The reason why I propose . to be Cast and Rubb’d one sixth part
thicker than a thin Space, is only that it may be readily distinguished
from : , - ; which are two sixth parts, three sixth parts, four sixth
parts, five sixth parts thicker than a thin Space. And for six sixth parts
thicker than a thin Space, two thin Spaces does it.
The manner of adjusting these several Sixth Parts of Thicknesses is
as follows. You may try if six . exactly agree, and be even with seven
thin Spaces; (or, which is all one, a Body) for then is each of those
six . one sixth part thicker than a thin Space, because it drives out a
thin Space in six thin Spaces. And you may try if six : be equal to a
Body and one thin Space; for then is each : two sixth parts thicker
than a thin Space. If six , be equal to nine thin Spaces, then each , is
three sixth parts of a thin Space thicker than a thin Space. If six - be
equal to ten thin Spaces, then each - is four sixth parts of a thin
Space thicker than a thin Space. If six ; be equal to eleven thin
Spaces, then each ; is five sixth parts of a thin Space thicker than a
thin Space.
Now, as aforesaid, a thin Space being one seventh part of the Body,
and the thin Space thus divided, you have the whole Body actually
divided into forty and two equal parts, as I have divided them in my
Drafts of Letters down the Sides, and in the Bottom-Line.
Though I have thus shewed how to divide a thin Space into six equal
Parts, yet when the Letter to be Cut proves of a small Body, the thin
Space divided into two equal Parts may serve: If it prove bigger, into
three or four equal Parts: And of the largest Bodies, they may be
divided into six, as aforesaid.
If now you would make a Gage for any number of thin Spaces and
Sixth Parts of a thin Space, you must take one thin Space less than
the number of thin Spaces proposed, and add . : , - ; according as
the number of sixth Parts of a thin Space require; and to those
complicated Thicknesses you may file a square Notch on the edge of
the thin Plate aforesaid, which shall be a standing Gage or Measure
for that number of thin Spaces and sixth Parts of a thin Space.
All the Exception against this way of Measuring is, that thin Spaces
cast in Metal may be subject to bow, and so their Thicknesses may
prove deceitful. But, in Answer to that, I say, you may, if you will,
Cast I for two thin Spaces thick, e for three thin Spaces thick, S for
four thin Spaces thick, L for five thin Spaces thick, D for six thin
Spaces thick, or any other Letters near these several Thicknesses,
as you think fit; only remember, or rather, make a Table of the
number of thin Spaces that each Letter on the Shank is Cast for. And
by complicating the Letters and Points, as aforesaid, you will have
any Thickness, either to make a Gage by, or to use otherwise.
On the other Edge of the Face-Gage you may file three other
Notches, of the same Width with those on the former Edge, for the
Long, the Assending, and Short-Letters. But though the two sides of
each of these Notches are parallel to each other, yet is not the third
side square to them, but hath the same Slope the Italick hath from
the Roman; as you may see in the Figure at b b b.

¶. 6. Of Italick, and other Standing Gages.

These Gages are to measure (as aforesaid) the Slope of the Italick
Stems, by applying the Top and Bottom of the Gage to the Top and
Bottom Lines of the Letters, and the other Side of the Gage to the
Stem: for when the Letter complies with these three sides of the
Gage that Letter hath its true Slope.
The manner of making these Gages (and indeed all other Angular
Gages) is thus.
Place one Point of a Pair of Steel Dividers upon the thin Plate
aforesaid, at the Point c or d (in Fig. D in Plate 10.) and with the
other Point describe a small fine Arch of a Circle; as, e f or g h. In
this Arch of the Circle must be set off on the Gage a 110 Degrees,
and on the Gage b 70 Degrees, and draw from the Centres c and d
two straight Lines through those numbers of Degrees: Then Filing
away the Plate between the two Lines, the Gages are finished.
To find the Measure of this, or any other number of Degrees, do
thus; Describe a Circle on a piece of Plate-Brass of any Radius (but
the larger the better) draw a straight Line exactly through the Centre
of this Circle, and another straight Line to cut this straight Line at
right Angles in the Centre, through the Circle; so shall the Circle be
divided into four Quadrants: Then fix one Foot of your Compasses
(being yet unstirr’d) in one of the Points where any of the straight
Lines cuts the Circle, and extend the moving Foot of your
Compasses where it will fall in the Circle, and make there a Mark,
which is 60 Degrees from the fixed Foot of the Compasses: Then fix
again one Foot of your Compasses in the Intersection of the straight
Line and Circle that is next the Mark that was made before, and
extend the moving Foot in the same Quadrant towards the straight
Line where you first pitch’d the Foot of your Compasses, and with
the moving Foot make another Mark in the Circle. These two Marks
divide the Quadrant into three equal Parts: The same way you may
divide the other three Quadrants; so shall the whole Circle be divided
into twelve equal Parts; and each of these twelve equal parts contain
an Arch of thirty Degrees: Then with your Dividers divide each of
these 30 Degrees into three equal Parts, and each of these three
equal Parts into two equal Parts, and each of these two equal Parts
into five equal Parts, so shall the Circle be divided into 360 equal
Parts, for your use.
To use it, describe on the Centre of the Circle an Arch of almost a
Semi-Circle: This Arch must be exactly of the same Radius with that
I prescribed to be made on the Gages a b, from e to f and from g to
h; then count in your Circle of Degrees from any Diametral Line 110
Degrees; and laying a straight Ruler on the Centre, and on the 110
Degrees aforesaid, make a small Mark through the small Arch; and
placing one Foot of your Compasses at the Intersection of the small
Arch, with the Diametral Line, open the other Foot to the Mark made
on the small Arch for 110 Degrees, and transfer that Distance to the
small Arch made on the Gage: Then through the Marks that the two
Points of your Compasses make in the small Arch on the Gage,
draw two straight Lines from the Centre c: and the Brass between
those two straight Lines being filed away, that Gage is made. In like
manner you may set off any other number of Degrees, for the
making of any other Gage.
In like manner, you may measure any Angle in the Drafts of Letters,
by describing a small Arch on the Angular Point, and an Arch of the
same Radius on the Centre of your divided Circle: For then, placing
one Foot of your Compasses at the Intersection of the small Arch
with either of the straight Lines proceeding from the Angle in the
Draft, and extending the other Foot to the Intersection of the small
Arch, with the other straight Line that proceeds from the Angle, you
have between the Feet of your Compasses, the Width of the Angle;
and by placing one Foot of your Compasses at the Intersection of
any of the straight Lines that proceed from the Centre of the divided
Circle, and the small Arch you made on it, and making a Mark where
the other Foot of your Compasses falls in the said small Arch, you
may, by a straight Ruler laid on the Centre of the divided Circle, and
the Mark on the small Arch, see in the Limb of the Circle the number
of Degrees contained between the Diametral, or straight Line and
the Mark.
If you have already a dividing-Plate of 360 Degrees, of a larger
Radius than the Arch on your Gage, you may save your self the
labour of dividing a Circle (as aforesaid,) and work by your dividing-
Plate as you were directed to do with the Circle that I shewed you to
divide.
In these Documents I have exposed my self to a double Censure;
First, of Geometricians: Secondly, of Letter-Cutters. Geometricians
will censure me for writing anew that which almost every young
Beginner knows: And Letter-Cutters will censure me for proposing a
Rule for that which they dare pretend they can do without Rule.
To the Geometricians I cross the Cudgels: yet I writ this not to them;
and I doubt I have written superfluously to Letter-Cutters, because I
think few of them either will or care to take pains to understand these
small Rudiments of Geometry. If they do, and be ingenious, they will
thank me for discovering this Help in their own Way, which few of
them know. For by this Rule they will not only make Letters truer, but
also quicker, and with less care; because they shall never need to
stamp their Counter-Punch in Lead, to see how it pleases them;
which they do many times, before they like their Counter-Punch, (be
it of A A V v W w V W, and several other Letters) and at last finish
their Counter-Punch but with a good Opinion they have that it may
do well, though they frequently see it does not in many Angular
Letters on different Bodies Cut by the same Hand. And were Letter-
Cutting brought to so common Practice as Joynery, Cabinet-making,
or Mathematical Instrument-making, every young Beginner should
then be taught by Rules, as they of these Trades are; because
Letter-Cutting depends as much upon Rule and Compass as any
other Trade does.
You may in other places, where you find most Convenience (as at i)
make a Square, which may stand you in stead for the Squaring the
Face and Stems of the Punch in Roman Letters, and also in many
other Uses.
And you may make Gages, as you were taught before to try the
Counter-Punches of Angular Letters; as, A K M N V X Y Z, Romans
and Italicks, Capitals and Lower-Case. But then, that you may know
each distinct Gage, you may engrave on the several respective
Gages, at the Angle, A A 4 &c. For by examining by the Drafts of
Letters, what Angle their Insides make, you may set that Angle off,
and make the Gage as you were taught before, in the Gage for the
Slope of Italicks.

¶. 7. Of the Liner.

The Liner is marked E in Plate 10. It is a thin Plate of Iron or Brass,

whose Draft is sufficient to express the Shape. The Use of it is on
the under-edge a b (which is about three Inches long) and is made
truly straight, and pretty sharp or fine; that being applied to the Face
of a Punch, or other piece of Work, it may shew whether it be
straight or no.

¶. 8. Of the Flat-Table.

The Flat-Table at F in Plate 10. The Figure is there sufficient. All its
Use is the Table F, for that is about one Inch and an half square, and
on its Superficies exactly straight and flat. It is made of Iron or Brass,
but Brass most proper. Its Use is to try if the Shank of a Punch be
exactly Perpendicular to its Face, when the Face is set upon the
Table; for if the Shank stand then directly upright to the Face of the
Table, and lean not to any side of it, it is concluded to be
perpendicular.
It hath several other Uses, which, when we come to Casting of
Letters, and Justifying of Matrices, shall be shewn.

¶. 9. Of the Tach.

The Tach is a piece of Hard Wood, (Box is very good) about three
Inches broad, six Inches long, and three quarters of an Inch thick.
About half its Length is fastned firm down upon the Work-Bench, and
its other half projects over the hither Edge of it. It hath three or four
Angular Notches on its Fore-end to rest and hold the Shank of a
Punch steady when the End of the Punch is screwed in the Hand-
Vice, and the Hand-Vice held in the left hand, while the Workman
Files or Graves on it with his Right Hand.
Instead of Fastning the Tach to the Bench, I Saw a square piece out
of the further half of the Tach, that it may not be too wide for the
Chaps of the Vice to take and screw that narrow End into the Chaps
of the Vice, because it should be less cumbersome to my Work-
Bench.

¶. 10. Of Furnishing the Work-Bench.

The Workman hath all his great Files placed in Leather Nooses, with
their Handles upwards, that he may readily distinguish the File he
wants from another File. These Nooses are nailed on a Board that
Cases the Wall on his Right Hand, and as near his Vice as
Convenience will admit, that he may the readier take any File he
wants.
He hath also on his Right Hand a Tin Pot, of about a Pint, with small
Files standing in it, with their Handles downwards, that their Blades
may be the readier seen. These small Files are called Watch-makers
Files, and the Letter-Cutter hath occasion to use these of all Shapes,
viz. Flat, Pillar, Square, Triangular, Round, Half-Round, Knife-Files,
&c.
He also provides a shallow square Box, of about five Inches long,
and three Inches broad, to lay his small Instruments in; as, his
Gages, his Liner, some common Punches, &c. This Box he places
before him, at the further side of the Work-Bench.
He also provides a good Oyl-Stone, to sharpen his Gravers and
Sculpters on. This he places at some distance from the Vice, on his
left hand.
 §. 13. ¶. 1. Of Letter-Cutting.
The Letter-Cutter does either Forge his Steel-Punches, or procures
them to be forged; as I shewed, Numb. 1. Fol. 8, 9, 10. in Vol. I. &c.
But great care must be taken, that the Steel be sound, and free from
Veins of Iron, Cracks and Flaws, which may be discerned; as I
shewed in Numb. 3. Vol. I. For if there be any Veins of Iron in the
Steel, when the Letter is Cut and Temper’d, and you would Sink the
Punch into the Copper, it will batter there: Or it will Crack or Break if
there be Flaws.
If there be Iron in it, it must with the Chissel be split upon a good
Blood-Red-Heat in that place, and the Iron taken or wrought out; and
then with another, or more Welding Heat, or Heats, well doubled up,
and laboured together, till the Steel become a sound entire piece.
This Operation Smiths call Well Currying of the Steel.
If there be Flaws in it, you must also take good Welding Heats, so
hot, that the contiguous sides of the Flaws may almost Run: for then,
snatching it quickly out of the Fire, you may labour it together till it
become close and sound.
Mr. Robinson, a Black-Smith of Oxford, told me a way he uses that is
ingenious, and seems rational: For if he doubts the Steel may have
some small Flaws that he can scarce discern, he takes a good high
Blood-Red Heat of it, and then twists the Rod or Bar (as I shewed,
Numb. 3. Vol. I.) which Twisting winds the Flaws about the Body of
the Rod, and being thus equally disposed, more or less, into the Out-
sides of the Rod, according as the Position of the Flaw may be,
allows an equal Heat on all sides to be taken, because the Out-sides
heat faster than the Inside and therefore the Out-sides of the Steel
are not thus so subject to Burn, or Run, as if it should be kept in the
Fire till the Middle, or Inside of it should be ready to Run. And when
the Steel is thus well welded, and soundly laboured and wrought
together with proper Heats, he afterwards reduces it to Form.
Now, that I may be the better understood by my Reader as he reads
further, I have, in Plate 10. at Fig. G described the several Parts of
the Punch; which I here explain.
 G The Face.
a a, b b The Thickness.
a b, a b The Heighth.
a c, b c, b c The Length of the Shank, about an Inch and
three quarters long.
c c c The Hammer-End.

This is no strict Length for the Shank, but a convenient Length; for
should the Letter Cut on the Face be small, and consequently, the
Shank so too, and the Shank much longer, and it (as seldom it is) not
Temper’d in the middle, it might, with Punching into Copper, bow in
the middle, either with the weight of the Hammer, or with light
reiterated Blows: And should it be much shorter, there might perhaps
Finger-room be wanting to manage and command it while it is
Punching into the Copper. But this Length is long enough for the
biggest Letters, and short enough for the smallest Letters.
The Heighth and Thickness cannot be assign’d in general, because
of the diversity of Bodies, and Thickness of Letters: Besides, some
Letters must be Cut on a broad Face of Steel, though, when it is Cut,
it is of the same Body; as all Letters are, to which Counter-Punches
are used; because the Striking the Counter-Punch into the Face of
the Punch will, if it have not strength enough to contain it, break or
crack one or more sides of the Punch, and so spoil it. But if the
Letter be wholly to be Cut, and not Counter-Punch’d, as I shall
hereafter hint in general what Letters are not, then the Face of the
Punch need be no bigger, or, at least, but a small matter bigger than
the Letter that is to be cut upon it.
Now, If the Letter be to be Counter-punch’d, the Face of the Punch
ought to be about twice the Heighth, and twice the Thickness of the
Face of the Counter-Punch; that so, when the Counter-Punch is
struck just on the middle of the Face of the Punch, a convenient
Substance, and consequently, Strength of Steel on all its Sides may
be contained to resist the Delitation, that the Sholder or Beard of the
Counter-Punch sinking into it, would else make.
If the Letter-Cutter be to Cut a whole Set of Punches of the same
Body of Roman and Italica, he provides about 240 or 260 of these
Punches, because so many will be used in the Roman and Italica
Capitals and Lower-Case, Double-Letters, Swash-Letters, Accented
Letters, Figures, Points, &c. But this number of Punches are to have
several Heighths and Thicknesses, though the Letters to be Cut on
them are all of the same Body.
What Heighth and Thickness is, I have shewed before in this §, but
not what Body is; therefore I shall here explain it.
By Body is meant, in Letter-Cutters, Founders and Printers
Language, the Side of the Space contained between the Top and
Bottom Line of a Long-Letter. As in the Draft of Letters, the divided
Line on the Left-Hand of A is divided into forty and two equal Parts;
and that Length is the Body, thus: J being an Ascending and
Descending Letter, viz. a long Letter, stands upon forty-two Parts,
and therefore fills the whole Body.
There is in common Use here in England, about eleven Bodies, as I
shewed in §. 2. ¶. 2. of this Volumne.
I told you even now, that all the Punches for the same Body must not
have the same Heighth and Thickness: For some are Long; as, J j Q,
and several others; as you may see in the Drafts of Letters: and
these Long-Letters stand upon the whole Heighth of the Body.
The Ascending and Descending Letters reach from the Foot-Line, up
to the Top-Line; as all the Capital Letters are Ascending Letters, and
so are many of the Lower-Case Letters; as, b d f, and several others.
The Descending Letters are of the same Length with the Ascending
Letters; as, g p q and several others. These are contained between
the Head-Line and the Bottom-Line. The Short Letters are contained
between the Head-Line and the Bottom-line. These are three
different Sizes of Heighth the Punches are made to, for Letters of the
same Body. But in proper place I shall handle this Subject more
large and distinctly.
And as there is three Heighths or Sizes to be considered in Letters
Cut to the same Body, so is there three Sizes to be considered, with
respect to the Thicknesses of all these Letters, when the Punches
are to be Forged: For some are m thick; by m thick is meant m
Quadrat thick, which is just so thick as the Body is high: Some are n
thick; that is to say, n Quadrat thick, viz. half so thick as the Body is
high: And some are Space thick; that is, one quarter so thick as the
Body is high; though Spaces are seldom Cast so thick, as shall be
shewed when we come to Casting: and therefore, for distinction
sake, we shall call these Spaces, Thick Spaces.
The first three Sizes fit exactly in Heighth to all the Letters of the
same Body; but the last three Sizes fit not exactly in Thickness to the
Letters of the same Body; for that some few among the Capitals are
more than m thick, some less than m thick, and more than n thick;
and some less than n thick, and more than Space thick; yet for
Forging the Punches, these three Sizes are only in general
Considered, with Exception had to Æ Æ Q, and most of the Swash-
Letters; which being too thick to stand on an m, must be Forged
thicker, according to the Workman’s Reason.
After the Workman has accounted the exact number of Letters he is
to Cut for one Set, he considers what number he shall use of each of
these several Sizes in the Roman, and of each of these several
Sizes in the Italick; (for the Punches of Romans and Italicks, if the
Body is large, are not to be Forged to the same shape, as shall be
shewed by and by) and makes of a piece of Wood one Pattern of the
several Sizes that he must have each number Forged to. Upon every
one of these Wooden Patterns I use to write with a Pen and Ink the
number of Punches to be Forged of that Size, lest afterwards I might
be troubled with Recollections.
I say (for Example) He considers how many long Letters are m thick,
how many Long-Letters are n thick, and how many Long-Letters are
Space thick, in the Roman; and also considers which of these must
be Counter-punch’d, and which not: For (as was said before) those
Letters that are to be Counter-punch’d are to have about twice the
Heighth and twice the Thickness of the Face of the Counter-Punch,
for the Reason aforesaid. But the Letters not to be Counter-punch’d
need no more Substance but what will just contain the Face of the
Letter; and makes of these three Sizes three Wooden Patterns, of
the exact Length, Heighth and Thickness that the Steel Punches are
to be Forged to.
He also counts how many are Ascendents and Descendents, m
thick, n thick, and Space thick; still considering how many of them
are to be Counter-punch’d, and how many not; and makes Wooden
Patterns for them.
The like he does for short-letters; and makes Wooden Patterns for
them, for Steel Punches to be Forged by.
And as he has made his Patterns for the Roman, so he makes
Patterns for the Italick Letters also; for the same shap’d Punches will
not serve for Italick, unless he should create a great deal more Work
to himself than he need do: For Italick Punches are not all to be
Forged with their sides square to one another, as the Romans are;
but only the highest and lowest sides must stand in Line with the
highest and lowest sides of the Roman; but the Right and Left-Hand
sides stand not parallel to the Stems of the Roman, but must make
an Angle of 20 Degrees with the Roman Stems: so that the Figure of
the Face of the Punch will become a Rhomboides, as it is called by
Geometricians, and the Figure of this Face is the Slope that the
Italick Letters have from the Roman, as in proper place shall be
further shewed. Now, should the Punches for these Letters be
Forged with each side square to one another, the Letter-Cutter would
be forced to spend a great deal of Time, and take great pains to File
away the superfluous Steel about the Face of the Letter when he
comes to the Finishing of it, especially in great Bodied Letters. Yet
are not all the Italick Letters to be Forged on the Slope; for the
Punches of some of them, as the m n, and many others, may have
all, or, at least, three of their sides, square to one another, though
their Stems have the common Slope, because the ends of their
Beaks and Tails lie in the same, perpendicular with the Outer Points
of the Bottom and Top of their Stems, as is shewed in the Drafts of
Letters.
Though I have treated thus much on the Forging of Punches, yet
must all what I have said be understood only for great Bodied
Punches; viz. from the Great-Primer, and upwards. But for smaller
Bodies; as English, and downwards, the Letter-Cutter generally, both
for Romans and Italicks, gets so many square Rods of Steel, Forged
out of about two or three Foot in Length, as may serve his purpose;
which Rods he elects as near his Body and Sizes as his Judgment
will serve him to do; and with the edge of a Half-round File, or a
Cold-Chissel, cuts them into so many Lengths as he wants Punches.
Nay, many of these Rods may serve for some of the small Letters in
some of the greater Bodies; and also, for many of their Counter-
Punches.
Having thus prepared your Punches, you must Neal them, as I
shewed in Numb. 3. Vol. I.

¶. 2. Of Counter-Punches.

The Counter-Punches for great Letters are to be Forged as the

Letter-Punches; but for the smaller Letters, they may be cut out of
Rods of Steel, as aforesaid. They must also be well Neal’d, as the
Punches. Then must one of the ends be Filed away on the outside
the Shank, to the exact shape of the inside of the Letter you intend to
Cut. For Example, If it be A you would Cut; This Counter-Punch is
easie to make, because it is a Triangle; and by measuring the Inside
of the Angle of A in the Draft of Letters, as you were taught, §. 12. ¶.
6. you may make on your Standing Gage-Plate a Gage for that
Angle: So that, let the Letter to be Cut be of what Body you will, from
the least, to the biggest Body, you have a Standing Gage for this
Counter-Punch, so oft as you may have occasion to Cut A.
The Counter-Punch of A ought to be Forged Triangularly, especially
towards the Punching End, and Tryed by the A-Gage, as you were
taught to use the Square, Numb. 3. Vol. I. Yet, for this and other
Triangular Punches, I commonly reserve my worn- out three square
Files, and make my Counter-Punch of a piece of one of them that
best fits the Body I am to Cut.
Having by your A-Gage fitted the Top-Angle and the Sides of this
Counter-Punch, you must adjust its Heighth by one of the three
Face-Gages mentioned in §. 12. ¶. 5. viz. by the Ascending Face-
Gage; for A is an Ascending Letter. By Adjusting, I do not mean, you
must make the Counter-Punch so high, as the Depth of the
Ascending Face-Gage; because in this Letter here is to be
considered the Top and the Footing, which strictly, as by the large
Draft of A, make both together five sixth Parts of a thin Space:
Therefore five sixth Parts must be abated in the Heighth of your
Counter-Punch, and it must be but four thin Spaces, and one sixth
part of a thin Space high, because the Top above the Counter-
Punch, and the Footing below, makes five sixth Parts of a thin
Space, as aforesaid.
Therefore, to measure off the Width of four thin Spaces and one
sixth Part of a thin Space, lay three thin Spaces, or, which is better,
the Letter e, which is three thin Spaces, as aforesaid; and . which is
one thin Space and one sixth part of a thin Space, upon one another;
for they make together, four thin Spaces, and one sixth part of a thin
Space; and the thickness of these two Measures shall be the
Heighth of the Counter-Punch, between the Footing and the Inner
Angle of A. And thus, by this Example, you may couple with proper
Measures either the whole forty-two, which is the whole Body, or any
number of its Parts, as I told you before.
This Measure of four thin Spaces and one sixth part of a thin Space
is not a Measure, perhaps, used more in the whole Set of Letters to
be Cut to the present Body, therefore you need not make a Standing
Gage for it; yet a present Gage you must have: Therefore use the
Sliding-Gage (described in §. 12. ¶. 4. and Plate 10. at B.) and move
the Socket c c on the Beam a a, till the Edge of the Sholder of the
Square of the Socket at the under-side of the Beam stands just the
Width of four thin Spaces and one sixth part of a thin Space, from
the Point of the Tooth b; which you may do by applying the Measure
aforesaid just to the Square and Point of the Tooth; for then if you
Screw down the Screw in the upper-side of the Sliding Socket, it will
fasten the Square at that distance from the Point of the Tooth. And
by again applying the side of the Square to the Foot of the Face of
the Counter-Punch, you may with the Tooth describe a small race,
which will be the exact Heighth of the Counter-Punch for A. But A
hath a Fine stroak within it, reaching from Side to Side, which by the
large Draft of A, you may find that the middle of this cross stroak is
two Thin Spaces above the bottom of this Counter-Punch; and with
your common Sliding-Gage measure that distance as before, and set
off that distance also on the Face of your Counter-Punch. Then with
the edge of a Fine Knife-File, File straight down in that race, about
the depth of a Thin Space, or somewhat more; So shall the Counter-
Punch for A be finisht. But you may if you will, take off the Edges or
Sholder round about the Face of the Counter-Punch, almost so deep
as you intend to strike it into the Punch: for then the Face of the
Counter-Punch being Filed more to a Point, will easier enter the
Punch than the broad Flat-Face. But note, That if it be a very Small
Bodied A you would make, the Edge of a Thin Knife-File may make
too wide a Groove: In this case you must take a peece of a well-
Temper’d broken Knife, and strike its Edge into the Face of the
Counter-Punch, as aforesaid.

¶. 3. Of Sinking the Counter-Punches.

Having thus finisht his Counter-Punch, he Hardens and Tempers it,

as was taught Numb. 3. fol. 57, 58. Vol. I. And having also Filed the
Face of his Punch he intends to cut his A upon, pretty Flat by guess,
he Screws the Punch upright, and hard into the Vice: And setting the
Face of his Counter-Punch as exactly as he can, on the middle of
the Face of his Punch, he, with an Hammer suitable to the Size of
his Counter-Punch, strikes upon the end of the Counter-Punch till he
have driven the Face of it about two Thin Spaces deep into the Face
of the Punch. So shall the Counter-Punch have done its Office.
But if the Letter to be Counter-Puncht be large, as Great-Primmer, or
upwards, I take a good high Blood-red Heat of it, and Screw it
quickly into the Vice; And having my Counter-Punch Hard, not
Temper’d, because the Heat of the Punch softens it too fast: And
also having before-hand the Counter-Punch Screwed into the Hand-
Vice with its Shank along the Chaps, I place the Face of the
Counter-Punch as before, on the middle of the Face of the Punch,
and with an Hammer drive it in, as before.
Taking the Punch out of the Vice, he goes about to Flat and
Smoothen the Face in earnest; for it had been to no purpose to Flat
and Smoothen it exactly before, because the Sinking of the Counter-
Punch into it, would have put it out of Flat again.
But before he Flats and Smoothens the Face of the Punch, He Files
by guess the superfluous Steel away about the Face of the Letter,
viz. so much, or near so much, as is not to be used when he comes
to finish up the Letter, as in this present Letter A, which standing
upon a Square Face on the Punch, meets in an Angle at the Top of
the Letter. Therefore the Sides of that Square must be Filed away to
an Angle at the Top of the Face of the Punch. But great care must be
taken, that he Files not more away than he should: For he considers
that the left-hand Stroak of A is a Fat Stroak, and that both the left-
hand and the right-hand Stroak too, have Footings, which he is
careful to leave Steel enough in their proper places for.
The reason why these are now Fil’d thus away, and not after the
Letter is finisht, is, Because in the Flatting the Face there is now a
less Body of Steel to File away, than if the whole Face of the Punch
had remain’d intire: For though the following ways are quick ways to
Flatten the Face, yet considering how tenderly you go to Work, and
with what Smooth Files this Work must be done, the riddance made
will be far less when a broad Face of Steel is to be Flatned, than
when only so much, or very little more than the Face of the Letter
only is to be Flatned.
To Flat and Smoothen the Face of the Punch, he uses the Flat-
Gage, (described §. 12. ¶. 3. and Plate 10. at A.) thus, He fits one
convex corner of the Shank of the Punch, into the Concave corner of
the Flat-Gage, and so applies his Flat-Gage-Punch and all to the
Face of the Using-File, and lets the Counter-Puncht end, viz. the
Face of the Punch Sink down to the Face of the Using-File: And then
keeping the convex Corner of the Shank of the Punch close and
steddy against the Concave corner of the Flat-Gage, and pressing
with one of his Fingers upon the then upper end of the Punch, viz.
the Hammer-end, he also at the same time, presses the lower end of
the Punch, viz. The Face against the Using-File, and thrusts the Flat-
Gage and Punch in it so oft forwards, till the extuberant Steel on the