Scott Donachie
Oftentimes, when thinking of moving towards a more sustainable future, the first idea that comes to mind is reducing the ever-growing carbon footprint fueled by heightened consumerism. One may also think about being conscious of their waste and recycling; the latter of the two referring to plastics, aluminum, and other packaging materials that commodities are commonly shipped and sold in. Although recycling and the reduction of carbon emissions help grapple with the climate crisis, they are somewhat independent of one another. There is not one mainstream way to recycle carbon emissions, but the state of North Dakota is proposing promising, albeit controversial solutions to surpass net zero.
The term net-zero is a relatively new environmental objective and refers to human-generated greenhouse gas emissions being completely counteracted by the removal of carbon from the atmosphere. North Dakota could become the first “Carbon negative state” in the United States according to Governor Doug Burgum.
It is hard to believe that the net-zero goal could be fulfilled in this state within only a few years. North Dakota’s Energy and Environmental Research Center claims that the state can store nearly 250 billion metric tons of carbon removed from the air. For reference, the state produces an average of 56 million tons of carbon per annum. In theory, if the state were able to maintain this average output into the foreseeable future, the carbon could be stored for nearly 4500 years until more storage needed to be added.
Carbon capture is by no means a new solution nor a permanent one. The idea was first documented in 1977, but is just now able to be utilized effectively enough to entirely negate carbon emissions. But is Burgum’s goal ultimately attainable? The carbon output may continue to increase in North Dakota and more generally around the world which renders the maximum storage capacity of carbon insufficient in far fewer years. Therefore, the most reliable course of action would be to apply a combination of the two on a large scale. Carbon capture and reduced carbon emissions synergize with each other.
Perhaps the situation is not as clear-cut as it seems at the surface level. Although Burgum is predicting North Dakota to be the leader in capturing and repurposing carbon from the atmosphere, he is not looking to eliminate the use of carbon-based fuels in the future. Opponents of Burgum believe that the state and nation as a whole should prioritize the use of alternative energy sources such as wind and solar. Relying too heavily on carbon capture presents the possibility of encouraging even more carbon production. Promoting the idea of capturing copious amounts of carbon with ease could potentially lead corporations and manufacturers to produce more since there is an illusion that we are now capable of nullifying carbon emissions forever. As mentioned previously, the solution is very promising, but the longevity of it is unknown.
Members of environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club believe this approach to be the wrong plan of action. Adam Willis, an author for the Grand Forks Herald wrote the following: “Wayde Schafer, a spokesman for the North Dakota chapter of the Sierra Club, said his organization supports the governor’s carbon neutrality pledge but added it was light on specifics.” Schafer is one of many who feels that the North Dakota state government owes it to the public to be more open about the logistics reaching such an ambitious goal. The skepticism is justified seeing as seldom efforts have managed to make a significant dent in halting climate change thus far, but it is nevertheless crucial to remain optimistic. If North Dakota does indeed become the first state to achieve negative carbon emissions, other states will likely follow in its footsteps. The process is not going to happen immediately: smaller strides such as this one will accumulate into a more ubiquitous strike against growing global carbon emissions.