First-Order Priorities
Research and development
Version published:
September 13, 2024 - 3:54pm
- Approach development and evaluation
- From Spark Climate Solutions’ Atmospheric Methane Primer
- Research on methane sinks and evolving oxidative capacity.
- Improved methane emissions baseline and projections.
- Expand monitoring of methane concentrations and fluxes and other precursors and products of methane reactions.
- Address mass transfer challenges – need to get enough volume of air into contact with the catalyst under the right conditions to break down a significant portion of the extremely dilute (2 ppm) methane, while keeping energy and resource use low.
- Recommendation for a Methane Removal Model Intercomparison Project by Jackson et al. 2021 that would address:
- Scenarios of different timing and amounts of methane removal.
- Comparisons of the climate impacts and Earth-system feedbacks of methane removal in different atmospheric and climate scenarios (e.g. low- and high-emission).
- Spatially explicit simulations of methane removal at prescribed locations and latitudes (requiring models to have an ‘emissions-driven’ methane capability).
- Studies of how methane’s relatively short lifetime, in conjunction with climate feedbacks on natural methane emissions, influences metrics of cumulative methane removal.
- Feedbacks with air quality, including tropospheric ozone (O3) concentrations, through OH chemistry and/or secondary aerosol formation.
- Interactions of methane removal with other mitigation and CDR approaches.
- For specific priorities related to iron salt aerosol methane removal see Gorham et al. 2024.
- Research agenda is forthcoming from the United States’ National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine.
- Approach development and evaluation
- From Spark Climate Solutions’ Atmospheric Methane Primer
- Research on methane sinks and evolving oxidative capacity.
- Improved methane emissions baseline and projections.
- Expand monitoring of methane concentrations and fluxes and other precursors and products of methane reactions.
- Address mass transfer challenges – need to get enough volume of air into contact with the catalyst under the right conditions to break down a significant portion of the extremely dilute (2 ppm) methane, while keeping energy and resource use low.
- Recommendation for a Methane Removal Model Intercomparison Project by Jackson et al. 2021 that would address:
- Scenarios of different timing and amounts of methane removal.
- Comparisons of the climate impacts and Earth-system feedbacks of methane removal in different atmospheric and climate scenarios (e.g. low- and high-emission).
- Spatially explicit simulations of methane removal at prescribed locations and latitudes (requiring models to have an ‘emissions-driven’ methane capability).
- Studies of how methane’s relatively short lifetime, in conjunction with climate feedbacks on natural methane emissions, influences metrics of cumulative methane removal.
- Feedbacks with air quality, including tropospheric ozone (O3) concentrations, through OH chemistry and/or secondary aerosol formation.
- Interactions of methane removal with other mitigation and CDR approaches.
- For specific priorities related to iron salt aerosol methane removal see Gorham et al. 2024.
- Research agenda is forthcoming from the United States’ National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine.
- Approach development and evaluation
- From Spark Climate Solutions’ Atmospheric Methane Primer
- Research on methane sinks and evolving oxidative capacity
- Improved methane emissions baseline and projections
- Expand monitoring of methane concentrations and fluxes and other precursors and products of methane reactions
- Address mass transfer challenges – need to get enough volume of air into contact with the catalyst under the right conditions to break down a significant portion of the extremely dilute (2 ppm) methane, while keeping energy and resource use low
- Recommendation for a Methane Removal Model Intercomparison Project by Jackson et al. 2021 that would address:
- Scenarios of different timing and amounts of methane removal
- Comparisons of the climate impacts and Earth-system feedbacks of methane removal in different atmospheric and climate scenarios (e.g. low- and high-emission)
- Spatially explicit simulations of methane removal at prescribed locations and latitudes (requiring models to have an ‘emissions-driven’ methane capability)
- Studies of how methane’s relatively short lifetime, in conjunction with climate feedbacks on natural methane emissions, influences metrics of cumulative methane removal
- Feedbacks with air quality, including tropospheric ozone (O3) concentrations, through OH chemistry and/or secondary aerosol formation
- Interactions of methane removal with other mitigation and CDR approaches
- For specific priorities related to iron salt aerosol methane removal see Gorham et al. 2024.
- Research agenda is forthcoming from the United States’ National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine.
Enabling conditions
Version published:
September 13, 2024 - 3:55pm
- Public funding for science and research and development.
- Further development of what priorities look like in different places for different actors will be needed.
- Public funding for science and research and development.
- Further development of what priorities look like in different places for different actors will be needed.
- Public funding for science and research and development
- Further development of what priorities look like in different places for different actors will be needed.
Engagement
Version published:
September 13, 2024 - 3:55pm
- Public engagement, education, and town halls about all aspects of the approach need to be developed and implemented in parallel with research in order to determine whether this approach can be implemented.
- Follow core engagement principles identified by the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) advisory committee (Jinnah et al. 2024):
- Start engagement efforts as early as possible.
- Include social scientists with engagement expertise on research teams during the research design process.
- Don’t presuppose what communities will be concerned about.
- Develop a plan to be responsive to community concern.
- Public engagement, education, and town halls about all aspects of the approach need to be developed and implemented in parallel with research in order to determine whether this approach can be implemented.
- Follow core engagement principles identified by the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) advisory committee (Jinnah et al. 2024):
- Start engagement efforts as early as possible.
- Include social scientists with engagement expertise on research teams during the research design process.
- Don’t presuppose what communities will be concerned about.
- Develop a plan to be responsive to community concern.
- Public engagement, education, and town halls about all aspects of the approach need to be developed and implemented in parallel with research in order to determine whether this approach can be implemented.
- Follow core engagement principles identified by the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) advisory committee (Jinnah et al. 2024):
- Start engagement efforts as early as possible
- Include social scientists with engagement expertise on research teams during the research design process
- Don’t presuppose what communities will be concerned about
- Develop a plan to be responsive to community concern
Help advance Arctic Sea Ice road maps. Submit Comments or Content
How to submit comments:
Thanks for helping to advance these roadmaps. Here is how it works!
Or, send general feedback to info@oceanvisions.org
All submitted comments will be reviewed by the Ocean Visions team to ensure that they are true, verifiable, and additive before being added to the road maps. You can increase the likelihood that your comments will be incorporated into the road maps by providing references (where appropriate).