"Nevertheless, we believe that every effort should be made to halt, and wherever possible reverse, the worldwide loss of coastal vegetation. Many of these sites have been built on, for coastal settlement, tourism and port development. "If you want to have extra carbon removal, you need extra habitat, and the scope for restoration is limited. The expected climate benefits from blue carbon ecosystem restoration may be achieved, yet it seems more likely they will fall seriously short. Lead author Dr Phil Williamson, honorary reader in UEA's School of Environmental Sciences, said: "We have looked into the processes involved in carbon removal and there are just too many uncertainties. However, they stress that blue carbon habitats should still be protected and, where possible, restored, as they have benefits for climate adaptation, coastal protection, food provision and biodiversity conservation.
The authors, who also looked at information on restoration costs, warn that extra measurements can reduce these risks, but would mean much higher costs. These include the high variability in carbon burial rates, vulnerability to future climate change, and fluxes of methane and nitrous oxide. The findings of their review, published today in the journal Frontiers in Climate, identify seven reasons why carbon accounting for coastal ecosystems is not only extremely challenging but risky. 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.In their analysis researchers from the University of East Anglia (UEA), the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and the OACIS initiative of the Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation, challenge the widely held view that restoring areas such as mangroves, saltmarsh and seagrass can remove large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO 2) from the atmosphere.Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.) Filing date Publication date Priority to US201261696372P priority Critical Priority to US201261732855P priority Priority to US201361793512P priority Priority to US201361793731P priority Priority to US201361793585P priority Priority to US201361807230P priority Priority to US201361809165P priority Priority to US201361819427P priority Priority to US201361844809P priority Priority to US201361844808P priority Priority to US201361866988P priority Application filed by Blue Planet Ltd filed Critical Blue Planet Ltd Priority to PCT/US2013/058090 priority patent/WO2014039578A1/en Publication of EP2892635A1 publication Critical patent/EP2892635A1/en Publication of EP2892635A4 publication Critical patent/EP2892635A4/en Status Withdrawn legal-status Critical Current Links Original Assignee Blue Planet Ltd Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
( en Inventor Brent Richard Constantz Mark BEWERNITZ Jacob Schneider Chris Camire Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate.
Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.) Withdrawn Application number EP13835810.6A Other languages German ( de) Info Publication number EP2892635A1 EP2892635A1 EP13835810.6A EP13835810A EP2892635A1 EP 2892635 A1 EP2892635 A1 EP 2892635A1 EP 13835810 A EP13835810 A EP 13835810A EP 2892635 A1 EP2892635 A1 EP 2892635A1 Authority EP European Patent Office Prior art keywords reactor bicarbonate brp composition cement Prior art date Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google Patents Carbon sequestration methods and systems, and compositions produced thereby Google Patents EP2892635A1 - Carbon sequestration methods and systems, and compositions produced thereby EP2892635A1 - Carbon sequestration methods and systems, and compositions produced thereby