Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands¶
Beerling, Kantzas, Lomas, Wade, Eufrasio, Renforth, Sarkar, et al. (2020). Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands. 583(7815), 242-248.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Sequestration
- When designing sequestration systems, ask the kinds of questions that Beerling et al. (2020) pose in evaluating enhanced rock weathering as a CO₂-removal pathway—what is the throughput?
This sourceQuantifies cost, throughput, secondary impacts, and monitoring infrastructure required for enhanced silicate weathering as a sequestration pathway—the canonical practitioner's question set.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract quantifies ERW's CDR potential (0.5–2 GtCO₂/yr) and costs, supporting throughput as a question the paper addresses, but it is an abstract only and does not frame a formal design-question set.
“Here we use an integrated performance modelling approach to make an initial techno-economic assessment for 2050, quantifying how CDR potential and costs vary among nations in relation to business-as-usual energy policies and policies consistent with limiting future warming to 2 degrees Celsius”
- When designing sequestration systems, ask the kinds of questions that Beerling et al. (2020) pose in evaluating enhanced rock weathering as a CO₂-removal pathway—what is the throughput?
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:ae14edad2266 · see in the full table