Cautious carbon removal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02048-5

IF: 30.7

2024-06-11

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal is an important part of climate mitigation pathways. However, its planning and implementation should be carefully reviewed given the potential limitations and risks.

meteorology & atmospheric sciences,environmental sciences,environmental studies

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.
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.
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
Key uncertainties behind global projections of direct air capture deployment

Kasra Motlaghzadeh,Vanessa Schweizer,Neil Craik,Juan Moreno-Cruz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121485

IF: 11.2

2023-07-12

Applied Energy

Abstract:To limit global warming to levels set in the Paris Agreement, integrated assessment modeling highlights the necessity of removing gigatons of carbon dioxide. Direct air capture is one of the potential methods for carbon dioxide removal and has gained significant attention despite being a relatively new technology. While some scenarios can meet Paris targets without relying on direct air capture, other models show the need for up to 38 gigatons/yr of removal by this technology. Such wide variation in projections reflects uncertainty over the feasibility of deploying direct air capture at scale and points the need for greater attention to the model assumptions driving this variation. This study provides a comprehensive review of scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Sixth Assessment Report and peer-reviewed studies focusing on direct air capture as a mitigation strategy. The review identifies several key factors contributing to uncertainty in direct air capture projections, including prolonged fossil fuel use, diversity of carbon removal methods, future socio-economic conditions, intergenerational assumptions, deployment limitations, and technology costs. The study recommends conducting multi-model assessments of direct air capture scenarios due to the influence of various assumptions and model structures on projections. The authors also suggest including different variants of direct air capture technology and both carbon utilization and storage pathways in future models, as these factors can impact system demands, economic efficiency, and public acceptability.

energy & fuels,engineering, chemical
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.
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 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
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
The future potential for Carbon Capture and Storage in climate change mitigation – an overview from perspectives of technology, economy and risk

Ronald Wennersten,Qie Sun,Hailong Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.023

IF: 11.1

2015-01-01

Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract:According to the recent IPCC reports, the effects from anthropogenic climate change effects are becoming more serious and actions more urgent. The global mean concentration of CO2, the most important Greenhouse Gas (GHG), in the atmosphere is now close to 400 ppm. The most comprehensive research efforts concerning safe levels propose that we should strive to keep the atmospheric concentration of CO2 below 350 ppm. This is also a more transparent global goal than using effects in the components of the climate system. Most scenarios show that the combustion of fossil fuels will increase in the future, while the development of renewables is still too marginal to stop this growth. The possibility that countries will leave fossil resources underground does not seem realistic. The only options in the short run to halt emissions of CO2 are the large-scale application of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in combination with increased energy efficiency. In the long run, we have to radically transform our societal metabolism towards greater resource efficiency, where renewables can play a more important role. The main barriers for implementation of CCS on a large scale are not technical, but economic and social. As long as the costs for emitting CO2 are much lower than implementing CCS technology, there will not be a market-driven development of CCS. A major challenge for CCS will be to achieve wide public acceptance, since this will also affect the future political attitude to it. This will require an open communication about safety aspects early in the planning phase, where it can be shown that safety issues can be handled, even in the event of major leaks of CO2. To assume a low probability of accidents is not a feasible way forward in the communication process. The future concerning CO2 emissions will be determined very much by actions of the biggest emitters. The developed countries have already emitted a large amount of CO2 and must now take a step forward to show that they are willing to invest in CCS technology. At this stage, it is reasonable to expect developed countries to take a leading role in developing the CCS technology on a large-scale. It is highly probable that developing countries like China will follow this path in the near future, since they have a clear ambition to take a lead in climate change mitigation in the long run and to avoid blame for a deteriorating environment.
The International Politics of Carbon Dioxide Removal: Pathways to Cooperative Global Governance

Bryan Maher,Jonathan Symons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00643

2022-02-01

Global Environmental Politics

Abstract:Abstract Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenarios that limit warming to 1.5°C require that, in addition to unprecedented reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions, between 100 and 1,000 metric gigatons of CO2 be removed from the atmosphere before 2100. Despite this, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is not yet firmly on national or global policy agendas. Owing to uncertainty about both technical potential and social license, it is unclear whether CDR on the required scale will even be feasible. This article asks what scholarship about the provision of global public goods can tell us about governing CDR. We identify four areas where new international cooperative efforts—likely performed by small clubs of motivated actors—could amplify existing CDR policy responses: development of CDR accounting and reporting methodologies, technology development and prototype deployment for technically challenging CDR, development of incentives for CDR deployment, and work on governance and accountability mechanisms that respond to social justice impacts and social license concerns.

political science,environmental studies,international relations
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
Carbon dioxide removal: A source of ambition or of delays? Examining expectations for CDR in Swiss climate policy

Juanita von Rothkirch,Olivier Ejderyan,Michael Stauffacher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103659

IF: 6.424

2024-01-10

Environmental Science & Policy

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is recognized as an important tool for addressing residual emissions and achieving net-zero emission targets. While some have cautioned that a focus on CDR in policy processes may lead to delayed efforts to mitigate emissions, others have argued that such concerns are unwarranted. Nevertheless, the circumstances under which CDR could help or delay emissions mitigation in given contexts remain unclear. This paper explores the emerging discourse on CDR in Switzerland. We examined how the CDR community legitimizes CDR and limits its scope, and what the implications are for emissions mitigation. Switzerland is home to growing businesses in CDR and has pioneered the implementation of international offsetting projects under Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. We found that numerous promises help legitimize and attract interest in CDR. Actors use discursive strategies and rules to limit CDR and avoid disappointment in its contribution to climate mitigation. The idea that emission reduction should prevail over removal is promoted accordingly, which ironically helps legitimize the CDR idea yet dodges the question of how much removal is possible and for balancing which emissions. Superficial engagement with the issue is reinforced by the normalization of inflated promises and the sentiment that the mitigation deterrence rhetoric erodes trust in CDR. We argue that this can contribute to mitigation delays by evading the debate on what it is possible to remove and taking resources from alternative measures. We recommend a thorough discussion to examine the risks and the implementation of rules that minimize them.

environmental sciences
Taking stock of carbon dioxide removal policy in emerging economies: developments in Brazil, China, and India

Felix Schenuit,Elina Brutschin,Oliver Geden,Fei Guo,Aniruddh Mohan,Ana Carolina Oliveira Fiorini,Sonakshi Saluja,Roberto Schaeffer,Keywan Riahi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2024.2353148

2024-05-26

Climate Policy

Abstract:Deliberately removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is an important element of bringing mitigation pathways in line with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. To reach global net-zero CO 2 emissions and limit global warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot, global mitigation pathways assessed by IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report require some world regions to achieve net-negative CO 2 emissions with large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) deployment. This raises important questions about the availability and feasibility of CDR deployment in different societal and political contexts. This paper therefore combines an analysis of CDR deployment in a sample of scenarios from the IPCC AR6 database with a bottom-up analysis of the state of CDR governance and policy in countries considered key in scaling up CDR capacity and not yet covered by existing research. In particular, the paper focuses on Brazil, China, and India as important emerging economies and large emitters. We highlight the expected use of CDR methods in those regions in scenarios and systematically assess and compare the level of CDR regulation and innovation across these countries. This comparative perspective has the potential to broaden the understanding of existing and emerging CDR policies and politics. The synthesis of the case studies provides three key contributions to existing literature: First, we explore the state of CDR governance and policymaking in key emerging economies. As in OECD countries, there is a notable lack of CDR regulation and innovation to enable the scale of CDR required in the short- and medium term. Second, we identify that repurposing policies is a key type of emerging CDR policymaking in these countries targeting CDR methods in the land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector. We find that the repurposing efforts strengthen the level of regulation and innovation for this group of methods. Third, we explore three building blocks (regional differentiation, delay of upscaling, sustainability thresholds) of plausible CDR deployment narratives that could help bridge integrated assessment models and comparative case studies in future research.

environmental studies,public administration
Carbon Removal Accounting for a Sustainable Future: Distributing CO2 Flows in Multiservice Systems

Gonzalo Rodriguez-Garcia,Miguel Brandão,Robert Anex

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410909

IF: 3.9

2024-12-13

Sustainability

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) systems are an integral part of sustainable pathways limiting global warming to less than 2.0 °C. When the sole purpose of CDR is capturing and storing atmospheric CO2, carbon registries offer detailed procedures to calculate the carbon removal credits. However, the registries do not address how to distribute CO2 flows when CDR provides additional services. Standardized, transparent rules for distributing CO2 flows among CDR services are required for the formation of efficient private and public carbon markets. The lack of such rules could result in double counting if those reductions are allocated to more than one service, decreasing the trustworthiness of carbon removal credits or deterring the delivery of an additional low-carbon service, thus limiting the economic viability and deployment of CDR. We examine allocation rules in carbon registries and carbon accounting guidelines, including their life cycle assessment (LCA) principles. We evaluate physical (mass-based) and non-physical (economic) allocation methods using a generic CDR system and find both to be unworkable. We then develop a mass balance (MB) approach which can reliably allocate captured and stored carbon (CSC) between carbon removal credits and other services based on the value CO2 removal in those markets. This practical approach to allocation can be used in a transparent way to provide flexibility that would allow CDR services to capture the value of the multiple services they provide and, through this, promote the deployment of these sustainable alternatives.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Secure robust carbon dioxide removal policy through credible certification

Felix Schenuit,Matthew J. Gidden,Miranda Boettcher,Elina Brutschin,Claire Fyson,Thomas Gasser,Oliver Geden,William F. Lamb,M. J. Mace,Jan Minx,Keywan Riahi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-01014-x

2023-10-03

Communications Earth & Environment

Abstract:Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) is a key element of any mitigation strategy aiming to achieve the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement, as well as national net-zero and net-negative greenhouse gas emissions targets. For robust CDR policy, the credibility of certification schemes is essential.
Carbon Removal Using Coastal Blue Carbon Ecosystems Is Uncertain and Unreliable, With Questionable Climatic Cost-Effectiveness

Phillip Williamson,Jean-Pierre Gattuso

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.853666

2022-07-28

Frontiers in Climate

Abstract:Mangrove forests, seagrass meadows and tidal saltmarshes are vegetated coastal ecosystems that accumulate and store large quantities of carbon in their sediments. Many recent studies and reviews have favorably identified the potential for such coastal “blue carbon” ecosystems to provide a natural climate solution in two ways: by conservation, reducing the greenhouse gas emissions arising from the loss and degradation of such habitats, and by restoration, to increase carbon dioxide drawdown and its long-term storage. The focus here is on the latter, assessing the feasibility of achieving quantified and secure carbon removal (negative emissions) through the restoration of coastal vegetation. Seven issues that affect the reliability of carbon accounting for this approach are considered: high variability in carbon burial rates; errors in determining carbon burial rates; lateral carbon transport; fluxes of methane and nitrous oxide; carbonate formation and dissolution; vulnerability to future climate change; and vulnerability to non-climatic factors. Information on restoration costs is also reviewed, with the conclusion that costs are highly uncertain, with lower-range estimates unrealistic for wider application. CO 2 removal using coastal blue carbon restoration therefore has questionable cost-effectiveness when considered only as a climate mitigation action, either for carbon-offsetting or for inclusion in Nationally Determined Contributions. Many important issues relating to the measurement of carbon fluxes and storage have yet to be resolved, affecting certification and resulting in potential over-crediting. The restoration of coastal blue carbon ecosystems is nevertheless highly advantageous for climate adaptation, coastal protection, food provision and biodiversity conservation. Such action can therefore be societally justified in very many circumstances, based on the multiple benefits that such habitats provide at the local scale.
Guest Editorial: Is CO2 Removal Technology Key to a Sustainable Future?

Siddarth Misra,Sateesh Kumar Puri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2118/0623-0010-jpt

2023-06-01

Journal of Petroleum Technology

Abstract:_ The urgent need to address climate change has unleashed a wave of innovative ideas on how to mitigate the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are driving the problem. Among the approaches considered to hold great promise is carbon dioxide removal, or what some call negative emissions technologies. These strategies have attracted significant attention in recent years and involve removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and storing it in long-term sinks such as oceans, forests, and underground geological formations. What follows is a closer look at how these strategies work, their potential to address the global climate crisis, and the challenges they currently face. Direct Air Capture (DAC) This technology captures CO2 directly from the air using chemical reactions and/or physical processes. The captured CO2 can then be stored in a long-term sink, used for food processing and cement manufacturing, or combined with hydrogen to create synthetic fuel. There are currently about 20 direct air capture plants operating worldwide. Climeworks’ Orca plant in Iceland, the largest operating DAC plant in the world, has the capacity to remove 4,000 tons of CO2 per year and store it deep underground. The majority of commercial direct air carbon capture techniques utilize large fans to force ambient air through a filter, with a liquid solvent, often amine-based or caustic, being used to absorb CO2 from the gas. There are three chemical processes that are being studied extensively for purposes of DAC: causticization using alkali and alkali-earth hydroxides, carbonation, and organic-inorganic hybrid sorbents consisting of amines supported in porous adsorbents. Additionally, others are exploring membrane separation methods based on semipermeable membranes to capture CO2, which require less water and a smaller footprint. Perhaps the biggest challenge facing this technology’s ability to scale up lies in its ability to be economically successful given current carbon credit pricing regimes balanced with the unknown amount of energy DAC units will need to achieve meaningful capture volumes. Ocean Fertilization The aim of ocean fertilization (OF) strategies is to enhance certain biological processes in the oceans that will lead to increased uptake of atmospheric CO2 followed by permanent storage in deep oceanic layers. The technique involves the addition of nutrients such as iron, phosphorus, and nitrogen to the ocean for stimulating the growth of phytoplankton that absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. When the marine species die, they sink to the ocean floor, taking the absorbed CO2 with them, where it is stored permanently. However, the implementation of OF has not been thoroughly studied and there are limited long-term experiments. Additionally, certain OF storage approaches are subject to reversibility. In other words, the stored carbon may not remain sequestered permanently and could be released back into the atmosphere due to the constant changes in ocean conditions such as temperature or nutrient availability. This issue highlights the need for caution and thorough study before implementing OF as a carbon dioxide removal strategy. The Convention on Biological Diversity and the London Protocol have called for appropriate regulations and assessments of risks and impacts related to climate-related geoengineering and OF.
Delaying carbon dioxide removal in the European Union puts climate targets at risk

Ángel Galán-Martín,Daniel Vázquez,Selene Cobo,Niall Mac Dowell,José Antonio Caballero,Gonzalo Guillén-Gosálbez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26680-3

IF: 16.6

2021-11-11

Nature Communications

Abstract:Abstract Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will be essential to meet the climate targets, so enabling its deployment at the right time will be decisive. Here, we investigate the still poorly understood implications of delaying CDR actions, focusing on integrating direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (DACCS and BECCS) into the European Union power mix. Under an indicative target of −50 Gt of net CO 2 by 2100, delayed CDR would cost an extra of 0.12−0.19 trillion EUR per year of inaction. Moreover, postponing CDR beyond mid-century would substantially reduce the removal potential to almost half (−35.60 Gt CO 2 ) due to the underused biomass and land resources and the maximum technology diffusion speed. The effective design of BECCS and DACCS systems calls for long-term planning starting from now and aligned with the evolving power systems. Our quantitative analysis of the consequences of inaction on CDR—with climate targets at risk and fair CDR contributions at stake—should help to break the current impasse and incentivize early actions worldwide.

multidisciplinary 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.
The Carbon Removal Budget: theory and practice

Ben Caldecott,Injy Johnstone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2024.2374515

2024-07-19

Carbon Management

Abstract:Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is a necessary complement to emissions reductions to achieve a state of global net zero emissions and stabilise future warming. Despite its utility, CDR remains poorly understood. Due to a range of constraints, CDR is a fundamentally finite resource, which we currently do not have enough of to achieve and go beyond global net zero. This has wide-ranging but underexplored implications for the technical and economic feasibility of our collective net zero transition. At the same time, both the opportunity and obligation to undertake CDR are not equally distributed amongst actors and geographies. As a result, there are ongoing questions as to how we can increase the supply of quality CDR whilst at the same time ensure equitable distribution of that same CDR, both within and between countries and non-state actors. To explore these phenomena, we introduce and define the concept of a Carbon Removal Budget (CRB), illustrate how it can apply to different contexts and scales, and distinguish it from the related but distinct concept of the carbon budget. We further estimate the global CRB, review its constraints and quality considerations and outline potential utilisation pathways and principles. We then examine the potential application of the CRB as a tool on which both public and private decision-makers can use to assess the feasibility of their nationally determined contributions and/or net-zero transition plans. In this manner, we illustrate how CRB forecasts can be used today to help build the net zero future of tomorrow.

environmental sciences,environmental studies

Cautious carbon removal

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

Simulated Carbon Cycle and Earth System Response to Atmospheric CO2 Removal

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

Key uncertainties behind global projections of direct air capture deployment

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Removal: Long-Term Consequences and Commitment

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

The carbon dioxide removal gap

Carbon dioxide removal technologies are not born equal

The future potential for Carbon Capture and Storage in climate change mitigation – an overview from perspectives of technology, economy and risk

The International Politics of Carbon Dioxide Removal: Pathways to Cooperative Global Governance

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

Carbon dioxide removal: A source of ambition or of delays? Examining expectations for CDR in Swiss climate policy

Taking stock of carbon dioxide removal policy in emerging economies: developments in Brazil, China, and India

Carbon Removal Accounting for a Sustainable Future: Distributing CO2 Flows in Multiservice Systems

Secure robust carbon dioxide removal policy through credible certification

Carbon Removal Using Coastal Blue Carbon Ecosystems Is Uncertain and Unreliable, With Questionable Climatic Cost-Effectiveness

Guest Editorial: Is CO2 Removal Technology Key to a Sustainable Future?

Delaying carbon dioxide removal in the European Union puts climate targets at risk

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

The Carbon Removal Budget: theory and practice