It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Marine CO2 removal (CDR) using enhanced-alkalinity seawater discharge was simulated in the estuarine waters of the Salish Sea, Washington, US. The high-alkalinity seawater would be generated using bipolar membrane electrodialysis technology to remove acid and the alkaline stream returned to the sea. Response of the receiving waters was evaluated using a shoreline resolving hydrodynamic model with biogeochemistry, and carbonate chemistry. Two sites, and two deployment scales, each with enhanced TA of 2997 mmol m−3 and a pH of 9 were simulated. The effects on air-sea CO2 flux and pH in the near-field as well as over the larger estuary wide domain were assessed. The large-scale deployment (addition of 164 Mmoles TA yr−1) in a small embayment (Sequim Bay, 12.5 km2) resulted in removal of 2066 T of CO2 (45% of total simulated) at rate of 3756 mmol m−2 yr−1, higher than the 63 mmol m−2 yr−1 required globally to remove 1.0 GT CO2 yr−1. It also reduced acidity in the bay, ΔpH ≈ +0.1 pH units, an amount comparable to the historic impacts of anthropogenic acidification in the Salish Sea. The mixing and dilution of added TA with distance from the source results in reduced CDR rates such that comparable amount 2176 T CO2 yr−1 was removed over >1000 fold larger area of the rest of the model domain. There is the potential for more removal occurring beyond the region modeled. The CDR from reduction of outgassing between October and May accounts for as much as 90% of total CDR simulated. Of the total, only 375 T CO2 yr−1 (8%) was from the open shelf portion of the model domain. With shallow depths limiting vertical mixing, nearshore estuarine waters may provide a more rapid removal of CO2 using alkalinity enhancement relative to deeper oceanic sites.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details





1 Energy and Environment Directorate, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory , Seattle, WA 98109, United States of America; University of Washington , Seattle, WA, United States of America
2 University of Washington , Seattle, WA, United States of America; Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA , Seattle, WA, United States of America
3 Energy and Environment Directorate, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory , Seattle, WA 98109, United States of America
4 University of Washington , Seattle, WA, United States of America
5 Marine and Coastal Research Laboratory, PNNL , Sequim, WA, United States of America
6 Ebb Carbon , Inc., San Carlos, CA, United States of America
7 Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences, Yale University , New Haven, CT, United States of America; Yale Center for Natural Carbon Capture, Yale University , New Haven, CT, United States of America
8 Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA , Seattle, WA, United States of America