[cschwarm]

The article fails to mention the costs of reducing carbon emissions. Compared to that, US$100 per tonne of CO₂ can be cheap.

The shutdown of the economy during Covid-19 provided a case study for the costs of reducing emissions by reducing consumption and production. According to the Rhodium group [1]:

> the emission reductions achieved this year as a result of COVID-19 are incredibly costly. We estimate the US will spend between $3,200 and $5,400 of lost economic output per ton of emissions avoided, depending on the shape of the recovery scenario.

In my opinion, only a market for CO2 emissions can find the least-cost solution for a net-zero society (both terms should be understood within the capabilities of human beings). As long as the revenue is actually used to pay for actual negative emissions (not offsets, or hypothetical social costs), climate change will stop (getting worse) as soon as supply equals demand, and a market clearing price is reached.

Let's say, this turns out to be about US$300 per tonne. If so, the article only demonstrates that there's money to be made using carbon capture from the air.

[1] https://rhg.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Taking-Stock-2020...