Sustainability limits needed for CO 2 removal

Alexandra Deprez,Paul Leadley,Kate Dooley,Phil Williamson,Wolfgang Cramer,Jean-Pierre Gattuso,Aleksandar Rankovic,Eliot L Carlson,Felix Creutzig,Eliot L. Carlson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adj6171

IF: 56.9

2024-02-02

Science

Abstract:The true climate mitigation challenge is revealed by considering sustainability impacts

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The role of carbon capture, utilization, and storage for economic pathways that limit global warming to below 1.5C

Jenny G. Vitillo,Matthew D. Eisaman,Edda S. P. Aradottir,Fabrizio Passarini,Tao Wang,Stafford W. Sheehan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104237

IF: 5.8

2022-01-01

iScience

Abstract:The 2021 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, for the first time, stated that CO2 removal will be necessary to meet our climate goals. How-ever, there is a cost to accomplish CO2 removal or mitigation that varies by source. Accordingly, a sensible strategy to prevent climate change begins by mitigating emission sources requiring the least energy and capital investment per ton of CO2, such as new emitters and long-term stationary sources. The pro-duction of CO2-derived products should also start by favoring processes that bring to market high-value products with sufficient margin to tolerate a higher cost of goods.
Prioritizing Non-Carbon Dioxide Removal Mitigation Strategies Could Reduce the Negative Impacts Associated with Large-Scale Reliance on Negative Emissions

Jeffrey Dankwa Ampah,Chao Jin,Haifeng Liu,Sandylove Afrane,Humphrey Adun,David Morrow,David T. Ho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c06866

IF: 11.4

2024-01-30

Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is necessary for reaching net zero emissions, with studies showing potential deployment at multi-GtCO(2) scale by 2050. However, excessive reliance on future CDR entails serious risks, including delayed emissions cuts, lock-in of fossil infrastructure, and threats to sustainability from increased resource competition. This study highlights an alternative pathway─prioritizing near-term non-CDR mitigation and minimizing CDR dependence. We impose a 1 GtCO(2) limit on...

environmental sciences,engineering, environmental
Hydrological limits to carbon capture and storage

Lorenzo Rosa,Jeffrey A. Reimer,Marjorie S. Went,Paolo D’Odorico

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0532-7

IF: 27.6

2020-05-04

Nature Sustainability

Abstract:Nature Sustainability, Published online: 04 May 2020; <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0532-7">doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0532-7</a>Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can reduce emissions from coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) but it needs additional power that increases water use for plant cooling. This study models the impacts of retrofitting CFPPs with CCS on water resources globally and finds areas at risk of water scarcity.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Between Scylla and Charybdis: Delayed mitigation narrows the passage between large-scale CDR and high costs

Jessica Strefler,Nico Bauer,Elmar Kriegler,Alexander Popp,Anastasis Giannousakis,Ottmar Edenhofer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aab2ba

IF: 6.7

2018-03-28

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:There are major concerns about the sustainability of large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. It is therefore an urgent question to what extent CDR will be needed to implement the long term ambition of the Paris Agreement. Here we show that ambitious near term mitigation significantly decreases CDR requirements to keep the Paris climate targets within reach. Following the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) until 2030 makes 2 °C unachievable without CDR. Reducing 2030 emissions by 20% below NDC levels alleviates the trade-off between high transitional challenges and high CDR deployment. Nevertheless, transitional challenges increase significantly if CDR is constrained to less than 5 Gt CO2 a−1 in any year. At least 8 Gt CO2 a−1 CDR are necessary in the long term to achieve 1.5 °C and more than 15 Gt CO2 a−1 to keep transitional challenges in bounds.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Disentangling the effects of CO2 and short-lived climate forcer mitigation

Joeri Rogelj,Michiel Schaeffer,Malte Meinshausen,Drew T Shindell,William Hare,Zbigniew Klimont,Guus J M Velders,Markus Amann,Hans Joachim Schellnhuber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1415631111

2014-11-18

Abstract:Anthropogenic global warming is driven by emissions of a wide variety of radiative forcers ranging from very short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs), like black carbon, to very long-lived, like CO2. These species are often released from common sources and are therefore intricately linked. However, for reasons of simplification, this CO2-SLCF linkage was often disregarded in long-term projections of earlier studies. Here we explicitly account for CO2-SLCF linkages and show that the short- and long-term climate effects of many SLCF measures consistently become smaller in scenarios that keep warming to below 2 °C relative to preindustrial levels. Although long-term mitigation of methane and hydrofluorocarbons are integral parts of 2 °C scenarios, early action on these species mainly influences near-term temperatures and brings small benefits for limiting maximum warming relative to comparable reductions taking place later. Furthermore, we find that maximum 21st-century warming in 2 °C-consistent scenarios is largely unaffected by additional black-carbon-related measures because key emission sources are already phased-out through CO2 mitigation. Our study demonstrates the importance of coherently considering CO2-SLCF coevolutions. Failing to do so leads to strongly and consistently overestimating the effect of SLCF measures in climate stabilization scenarios. Our results reinforce that SLCF measures are to be considered complementary rather than a substitute for early and stringent CO2 mitigation. Near-term SLCF measures do not allow for more time for CO2 mitigation. We disentangle and resolve the distinct benefits across different species and therewith facilitate an integrated strategy for mitigating both short and long-term climate change.
The carbon dioxide removal gap

William F. Lamb,Thomas Gasser,Rosa M. Roman-Cuesta,Giacomo Grassi,Matthew J. Gidden,Carter M. Powis,Oliver Geden,Gregory Nemet,Yoga Pratama,Keywan Riahi,Stephen M. Smith,Jan Steinhauser,Naomi E. Vaughan,Harry B. Smith,Jan C. Minx

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-01984-6

IF: 30.7

2024-05-04

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Rapid emissions reductions, including reductions in deforestation-based land emissions, are the dominant source of global climate mitigation potential in the coming decades. However, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will also have an important role to play. Despite this, it remains unclear whether current national proposals for CDR align with temperature targets. Here we show the 'CDR gap', that is, CDR efforts proposed by countries fall short of those in integrated assessment model scenarios that limit warming to 1.5 °C. However, the most ambitious proposals for CDR are close to levels in a low-energy demand scenario with the most-limited CDR scaling and aggressive near-term emissions reductions. Further, we observe that many countries propose to expand land-based removals, but none yet commit to substantively scaling novel methods such as bioenergy carbon capture and storage, biochar or direct air carbon capture and storage.

meteorology & atmospheric sciences,environmental sciences,environmental studies
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Removal: Long-Term Consequences and Commitment

Long Cao,Ken Caldeira

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/2/024011

IF: 6.7

2010-01-01

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:Carbon capture from ambient air has been proposed as a mitigation strategy to counteract anthropogenic climate change. We use an Earth system model to investigate the response of the coupled climate–carbon system to an instantaneous removal of all anthropogenic CO2 from the atmosphere. In our extreme and idealized simulations, anthropogenic CO2 emissions are halted and all anthropogenic CO2 is removed from the atmosphere at year 2050 under the IPCC A2 CO2 emission scenario when the model-simulated atmospheric CO2 reaches 511 ppm and surface temperature reaches 1.8 °C above the pre-industrial level. In our simulations a one-time removal of all anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere reduces surface air temperature by 0.8 °C within a few years, but 1 °C surface warming above pre-industrial levels lasts for several centuries. In other words, a one-time removal of 100% excess CO2 from the atmosphere offsets less than 50% of the warming experienced at the time of removal. To maintain atmospheric CO2 and temperature at low levels, not only does anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere need to be removed, but anthropogenic CO2 stored in the ocean and land needs to be removed as well when it outgasses to the atmosphere. In our simulation to maintain atmospheric CO2 concentrations at pre-industrial levels for centuries, an additional amount of CO2 equal to the original CO2 captured would need to be removed over the subsequent 80 years.
Simulated Carbon Cycle and Earth System Response to Atmospheric CO2 Removal

Long Cao,Xiao-Yu Jin,Jiu Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2023.03.001

2022-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:To project possible future climate change, it is important to understand Earth system response to CO2 removal, a potential key method to limit global warming. Previous studies examined some aspects of Earth system response to different scenarios of CO2 removal, but lacked a systematic analysis of the carbon cycle and climate system response in a consistent modeling framework. We expanded previous studies by using an Earth system model to examine the response of land and ocean carbon cycle, as well as a set of climate variables to idealized scenarios of atmospheric CO2 removal with different removal rates. In the scenarios considered, atmospheric CO2 increases at a rate of 1% per year to four times of its preindustrial level, and then decreases at a rate of 0.5%, 1%, and 2% per year to the preindustrial level. Simulation results show that a reduction of atmospheric CO2 induces CO2 release from both the ocean and terrestrial biosphere, and to keep atmospheric CO2 at a lower level requires the removal of anthropogenic CO2 not only from the atmosphere, but from the ocean and land carbon reservoirs as well. The response of many variables of the Earth system, including temperature, ocean heat content, sea level, deep ocean acidity, and permafrost area and carbon, lags the decrease in atmospheric CO2 ranging from a few years to many centuries. A few centuries after atmospheric CO2 returns to the preindustrial level, sea level is still substantially higher than the preindustrial level, and permafrost continues losing CO2 to the atmosphere. Our study demonstrates that to offset previous positive CO2 emissions by atmospheric CO2 removal does not mean to offset climate consequence of positive CO2 emissions. Rapid and deep reduction in CO2 emissions is key to prevent and limit increasing risks from further warming. Our study provides new insights into the carbon cycle and climate system response to CO2 removal, which would help to assess future climate change and the associated impacts.
The role of carbon capture, utilization, and storage for economic pathways that limit global warming to below 1.5°C

Jenny G. Vitillo,Matthew D. Eisaman,Edda S.P. Aradóttir,Fabrizio Passarini,Tao Wang,Stafford W. Sheehan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104237

IF: 5.8

2022-05-01

iScience

Abstract:The 2021 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, for the first time, stated that CO2 removal will be necessary to meet our climate goals. However, there is a cost to accomplish CO2 removal or mitigation that varies by source. Accordingly, a sensible strategy to prevent climate change begins by mitigating emission sources requiring the least energy and capital investment per ton of CO2, such as new emitters and long-term stationary sources. The production of CO2-derived products should also start by favoring processes that bring to market high-value products with sufficient margin to tolerate a higher cost of goods.

multidisciplinary sciences
Points of No Return to Respect the Paris Agreement

Thomas Bossy,Thomas Gasser,Philippe Ciais,Katsumasa Tanaka,Franck Lecocq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu22-1075

2022-01-01

Abstract:The physical reality of the Earth system implies that there are clear conditions to respect the Paris agreement, or to limit any climate impact below a certain level. To be policy relevant, these conditions should be expressed in terms of emission targets, such as peaking date, budget, or annual value of global CO2 emissions. They have been explored by the IPCC using integrated assessment models. However, past work has focused on bottom-up scenarios, and on temperature as the only metric evaluating climate impacts, even though not all impacts are linearly related to it.Here, we show that for these emission targets, across thousands of scenarios we have generated, there are points of no return after which limiting a given climate impact becomes geophysically infeasible. In addition to the Paris Agreement objectives (consisting of a 1.5 °C temperature target above pre-industrial (PI) era possibly overshot by no more than 0.5°C), we investigate three other climate targets: ocean acidification, sea-level elevation rate, and Arctic sea-ice melting. We use a newly developed model called PathFinder; a reduced-form carbon-climate model that also emulates the three global climate impacts we investigate. The model is calibrated through Bayesian inference, using outputs from the state-of-the-art CMIP6 models as prior parameters, and the latest IPCC assessment and observations of the Earth system as constraints. This advanced calibration is enabled by the model’s capacity of using temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration as inputs (instead of anthropogenic emissions and non-CO2 radiative forcing).Thanks to this backward approach, we demonstrate that, for every emission target considered, the combination of climate impact targets is non-linear. While the Paris Agreement insists on the importance of reaching a carbon neutral world in 2050, our results show that global CO2 emissions must peak before 2030 but do not have to reach net-zero to keep all targets reachable with at least 50% chances. We also highlight the inevitable role of geoengineering technologies in reaching the Paris Agreement, as chances to keep it reachable goes from at least 69% if SRM or CDR are available to 10% if none of them is.
Land-use Emissions Play a Critical Role in Land-Based Mitigation for Paris Climate Targets

Anna B. Harper,Tom Powell,Peter M. Cox,Joanna House,Chris Huntingford,Timothy M. Lenton,Stephen Sitch,Eleanor Burke,Sarah E. Chadburn,William J. Collins,Edward Comyn-Platt,Vassilis Daioglou,Jonathan C. Doelman,Garry Hayman,Eddy Robertson,Detlef van Vuuren,Andy Wiltshire,Christopher P. Webber,Ana Bastos,Lena Boysen,Philippe Ciais,Narayanappa Devaraju,Atul K. Jain,Andreas Krause,Ben Poulter,Shijie Shu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05340-z

IF: 16.6

2018-01-01

Nature Communications

Abstract:Scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 °C by 2100 assume significant land-use change to support large-scale carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) removal from the atmosphere by afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, and Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). The more ambitious mitigation scenarios require even greater land area for mitigation and/or earlier adoption of CO 2 removal strategies. Here we show that additional land-use change to meet a 1.5 °C climate change target could result in net losses of carbon from the land. The effectiveness of BECCS strongly depends on several assumptions related to the choice of biomass, the fate of initial above ground biomass, and the fossil-fuel emissions offset in the energy system. Depending on these factors, carbon removed from the atmosphere through BECCS could easily be offset by losses due to land-use change. If BECCS involves replacing high-carbon content ecosystems with crops, then forest-based mitigation could be more efficient for atmospheric CO 2 removal than BECCS.
Carbon dioxide removal technologies are not born equal

Jessica Strefler,Nico Bauer,Florian Humpenöder,David Klein,Alexander Popp,Elmar Kriegler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac0a11

IF: 6.7

2021-07-01

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:Abstract Technologies for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere have been recognized as an important part of limiting warming to well below 2 °C called for in the Paris Agreement. However, many scenarios so far rely on bioenergy in combination with carbon capture and storage as the only CDR technology. Various other options have been proposed, but have scarcely been taken up in an integrated assessment of mitigation pathways. In this study we analyze a comprehensive portfolio of CDR options in terms of their regional and temporal deployment patterns in climate change mitigation pathways and the resulting challenges. We show that any CDR option with sufficient potential can reduce the economic costs of achieving the 1.5 °C target substantially without increasing the temperature overshoot. CDR helps to reduce net CO 2 emissions faster and achieve carbon neutrality earlier. The regional distribution of CDR deployment in cost-effective mitigation pathways depends on which options are available. If only enhanced weathering of rocks on croplands or re- and afforestation are available, Latin America and Asia cover nearly all of global CDR deployment. Besides fairness and sustainability concerns, such a regional concentration would require large international transfers and thus strong international institutions. In our study, the full portfolio scenario is the most balanced from a regional perspective. This indicates that different CDR options should be developed such that all regions can contribute according to their regional potentials.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Fairness and feasibility in deep mitigation pathways with novel carbon dioxide removal considering institutional capacity to mitigate

Matthew J Gidden,Elina Brutschin,Gaurav Ganti,Gamze Ünlü,Behnam Zakeri,Oliver Fricko,Benjamin Mitterrutzner,Francesco Lovat,Keywan Riahi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acd8d5

IF: 6.7

2023-05-27

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:Questions around the technical and political feasibility of deep mitigation scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have increasingly been raised as have calls for more directly analyzing and incorporating aspects of justice and fairness. Simultaneously, models are increasing the technical representation of novel carbon-dioxide removal (CDR) approaches to provide policy-relevant analyses of mitigation portfolios in the context of the rising number of net-zero CO2 and GHG targets made by parties to the Paris Agreement. Still, in most cost-effective mitigation scenarios developed by Integrated Assessment Models, a significant portion of mitigation is assumed to take place in developing regions. We address these intersecting questions through analyzing scenarios that include Direct Air Capture of CO2 with Storage (DACCS), a novel CDR technology that is not dependent on land potential and can be deployed widely, as well as regional variations in institutional capacity for mitigation based on country-level governance indicators. We find that including novel CDR and representations of institutional capacity can enhance both the feasibility and fairness of 2°C and 1.5°C high-overshoot scenarios, especially in the near term, with institutional capacity playing a stronger role than the presence of additional carbon removal methods. However, our results indicate that new CDR methods being studied by models are not likely to change regional mitigation outcomes of scenarios which achieve the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement. Thus, while engineering carbon removals like DACCS may play a significant role by midcentury, gross emissions reductions in mitigation pathways arriving at net-zero CO2 emissions in line with 1.5°C do not substantially change. Our results highlight that further investment and development of novel CDR is critical for post-net-zero CO2 mitigation, but that equitable achievement of this milestone will need to arrive through technical and financial transfers, rather than by substantial carbon removals in developed countries.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Long-term climate implications of twenty-first century options for carbon dioxide emission mitigation

P. Friedlingstein,S. Solomon,G-K. Plattner,R. Knutti,P. Ciais,M. R. Raupach

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1302

IF: 30.7

2011-01-01

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Decisions about how soon, how quickly and by how much carbon dioxide emissions are reduced will determine whether the climate target of limiting warming to 2 °C can be met. Research reveals that it will probably only be possible if ambitious reductions are implemented within the next two decades and emissions eventually fall to zero.
Diverse carbon dioxide removal approaches could reduce impacts on the energy–water–land system

Jay Fuhrman,Candelaria Bergero,Maridee Weber,Seth Monteith,Frances M. Wang,Andres F. Clarens,Scott C. Doney,William Shobe,Haewon McJeon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01604-9

IF: 30.7

2023-03-10

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is a critical tool in all plans to limit warming to below 1.5 °C, but only a few CDR pathways have been incorporated into integrated assessment models that international climate policy deliberations rely on. A more diverse set of CDR approaches could have important benefits and costs for energy–water–land systems. Here we use an integrated assessment model to assess a complete suite of CDR approaches including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, afforestation, direct air capture with carbon storage, enhanced weathering, biochar and direct ocean capture with carbon storage. CDR provided by each approach spans three orders of magnitude, with deployment and associated impacts varying between regions. Total removals reach approximately 10 GtCO 2 yr −1 globally, largely to offset residual CO 2 and non-CO 2 emissions, which remain costly to avoid even under scenarios specifically designed to reduce them.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
The legacy of our CO2 emissions: a clash of scientific facts, politics and ethics

Reto Knutti,Joeri Rogelj

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1340-3

2015-02-03

Climatic Change

Abstract:Of the carbon dioxide that we emit, a substantial fraction remains in the atmosphere for thousands of years. Combined with the slow response of the climate system, this results in the global temperature increase resulting from CO2 being nearly proportional to the total emitted amount of CO2 since preindustrial times. This has a number of simple but far-reaching consequences that raise important questions for climate change mitigation, policy and ethics. Even if anthropogenic emissions of CO2 were stopped, most of the realized climate change would persist for centuries and thus be irreversible on human timescales, yet standard economic thinking largely discounts these long-term intergenerational effects. Countries and generations to first order contribute to both past and future climate change in proportion to their total emissions. A global temperature target implies a CO2 “budget” or “quota”, a finite amount of CO2 that society is allowed to emit to stay below the target. Distributing that budget over time and between countries is an ethical challenge that our world has so far failed to address. Despite the simple relationship between CO2 emissions and temperature, the consequences for climate policy and for sharing the responsibility of reducing global CO2 emissions can only be drawn in combination with judgments about equity, fairness, the value of future generations and our attitude towards risk.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
CO2 removal and 1.5°C: what, when, where, and how?

Solene Chiquier,Mathilde Fajardy,Niall Mac Dowell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.04029

2022-04-08

Physics and Society

Abstract:The international community aims to limit global warming to 1.5{\deg}C, but little progress has been made towards a global, cost-efficient, and fair climate mitigation plan to deploy carbon dioxide removal (CDR) at the Paris Agreement's scale. Here, we investigate how different CDR options - AR, BECCS, and DACCS - might be deployed to meet the Paris Agreement's CDR objectives. We find that international cooperation in climate mitigation policy is key for deploying the most cost-efficient CDR pathway - comprised of BECCS, mainly (74%), and AR (26%) -, allowing to take the most advantage of regional bio-geophysical resources and socio-economic factors, and time variations, and therefore minimising costs. Importantly, with international cooperation, the spatio-temporal evolution of the CDR pathway differs greatly from the socio-economically fair regional allocation of the Paris Agreement's CDR objectives. With limited, or no international cooperation, we find that the likelihood of delivering these CDR objectives decreases, as deploying CDR pathways becomes significantly more challenging and costly - particularly when leading to the deployment of DACCS. Moreover, we show that developing international cooperation policy instruments - such as an international market for negative emissions trading - can deliver, simultaneously, cost-efficient and equitable CDR at the Paris Agreement's scale, by incentivising participating nations to meet their share of the Paris Agreement's CDR objectives, whilst making up for the uneven distribution of CDR potentials across the world. Crucially, we conclude that international cooperation is imperative, as soon as possible, to preserve the feasibility and sustainability of future CDR pathways, and ensure that future generations do not bear the burden, increasingly costlier, of climate mitigation inaction.
Moving toward Net-Zero Emissions Requires New Alliances for Carbon Dioxide Removal

Sabine Fuss,Josep G. Canadell,Philippe Ciais,Robert B. Jackson,Chris D. Jones,Anders Lyngfelt,Glen P. Peters,Detlef P. Van Vuuren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.002

IF: 14.944

2020-01-01

One Earth

Abstract:The 1.5 degrees C target will require removing at least some of the carbon dioxide (CO2) previously emitted. Knowledge on how this can be done has been increasing, though barriers remain concerning governance, policy, and acceptability. For the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP26) to move beyond an academic debate on CO2 removal (CDR), a broader alliance of research and policy communities, industry, and the public is needed.
A generalizable framework for enhanced natural climate solutions

Lucas C. R. Silva,Mary C. Wood,Bart R. Johnson,Michael R. Coughlan,Heather Brinton,Krista McGuire,Scott D. Bridgham

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-022-05472-8

IF: 4.993

2022-06-19

Plant and Soil

Abstract:The natural removal of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) from the atmosphere through land conservation, restoration, and management is receiving increasing attention as a scalable approach for climate change mitigation. However, different land-use sectors compete for resources and incentives within and across geopolitical regions, resulting in divergent goals and inefficient prioritization of CO 2 removal efforts. Thus, a unifying framework is needed to accelerate basic research and coordinated interventions to accelerate climate change mitigation.

plant sciences,soil science,agronomy
What Role for Short-Lived Climate Pollutants in Mitigation Policy?

J. K. Shoemaker,D. P. Schrag,M. J. Molina,V. Ramanathan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240162

IF: 56.9

2013-12-12

Science

Abstract:Parallel strategies must focus on long- and short-lived pollutants, but not at the cost of reducing pressure for action on CO 2 .

multidisciplinary sciences

Sustainability limits needed for CO 2 removal

The role of carbon capture, utilization, and storage for economic pathways that limit global warming to below 1.5C

Prioritizing Non-Carbon Dioxide Removal Mitigation Strategies Could Reduce the Negative Impacts Associated with Large-Scale Reliance on Negative Emissions

Hydrological limits to carbon capture and storage

Between Scylla and Charybdis: Delayed mitigation narrows the passage between large-scale CDR and high costs

Disentangling the effects of CO2 and short-lived climate forcer mitigation

The carbon dioxide removal gap

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Removal: Long-Term Consequences and Commitment

Simulated Carbon Cycle and Earth System Response to Atmospheric CO2 Removal

The role of carbon capture, utilization, and storage for economic pathways that limit global warming to below 1.5°C

Points of No Return to Respect the Paris Agreement

Land-use Emissions Play a Critical Role in Land-Based Mitigation for Paris Climate Targets

Carbon dioxide removal technologies are not born equal

Fairness and feasibility in deep mitigation pathways with novel carbon dioxide removal considering institutional capacity to mitigate

Long-term climate implications of twenty-first century options for carbon dioxide emission mitigation

Diverse carbon dioxide removal approaches could reduce impacts on the energy–water–land system

The legacy of our CO2 emissions: a clash of scientific facts, politics and ethics

CO2 removal and 1.5°C: what, when, where, and how?

Moving toward Net-Zero Emissions Requires New Alliances for Carbon Dioxide Removal

A generalizable framework for enhanced natural climate solutions

What Role for Short-Lived Climate Pollutants in Mitigation Policy?