scholarly journals The Role of Carbon Dioxide Removal in Net-zero Emissions Pledges

2021 ◽  
pp. 100043
Author(s):  
Gokul Iyer ◽  
Leon Clarke ◽  
Jae Edmonds ◽  
Allen Fawcett ◽  
Jay Fuhrman ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1739-1743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoichi Kaya ◽  
Mitsutsune Yamaguchi ◽  
Oliver Geden

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Camporota ◽  
Nicholas Barrett

Mechanical ventilation in patients with respiratory failure has been associated with secondary lung injury, termed ventilator-induced lung injury. Extracorporeal venovenous carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) appears to be a feasible means to facilitate more protective mechanical ventilation or potentially avoid mechanical ventilation in select patient groups. With this expanding role of ECCO2R, we aim to describe the technology and the main indications of ECCO2R.


One Earth ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-149
Author(s):  
Sabine Fuss ◽  
Josep G. Canadell ◽  
Philippe Ciais ◽  
Robert B. Jackson ◽  
Chris D. Jones ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Buylova ◽  
Mathias Fridahl ◽  
Naghmeh Nasiritousi ◽  
Gunilla Reischl

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) increasingly features in climate scenarios that hold global warming well below 2°C by 2100. Given the continuous gap between climate mitigation pledges and the emission pathways that are aligned with achieving the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, we would expect countries to promote CDR in their long-term planning to achieve mid-century targets. Yet, countries may not consider it their responsibility to contribute to the global response to climate change using CDR. Thus, a study of the respective country's long-term climate plans is both timely and vital. Such a study could reveal the pledged collective ambition, the contribution of CDR to the pledged ambition, and how the envisaged role of CDR is described by the different countries. This paper explores the long-term low emission development strategies (LT-LEDS) of countries in order to map the role of CDR in addressing climate change. We also supplement our examination of strategies with the opinions of climate experts. Based on an inductive coding of the material and a literature review, the analytical focus of the analysis includes CDR targets and planning, types of CDR, barriers and opportunities to CDR implementation, as well as international cooperation. Our study of 25 national LT-LEDS submitted to the UN or to the EU, as well as 23 interviews with climate experts, shows that national plans for CDR vary substantially across countries and are generally lacking in detail. The findings also demonstrate that CDR is perceived to be necessary and desirable for achieving mid-century climate goals, but also reveal variation in the intended role of CDR. We use an interpretive approach to outline three possible visions of CDR in climate action: as a panacea, as a necessary fallback and as a chimera. We conclude by discussing what our findings of the envisaged roles of CDR in addressing climate change mean for climate governance. This research thereby contributes to the literature on governing CDR with new comprehensive insights into the long-term climate strategies of countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Schenuit ◽  
Rebecca Colvin ◽  
Mathias Fridahl ◽  
Barry McMullin ◽  
Andy Reisinger ◽  
...  

Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets. The scientific literature on CDR governance and policy is still rather scarce, with empirical case studies and comparisons largely missing. Based on an analytical framework that draws on the multi-level perspective of sociotechnical transitions as well as existing work on CDR governance, we gathered and assessed empirical material until early 2021 from 9 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) cases: the European Union and three of its Member States (Ireland, Germany, and Sweden), Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Based on a synthesis of differences and commonalities, we propose a tripartite conceptual typology of the varieties of CDR policymaking: (1) incremental modification of existing national policy mixes, (2) early integration of CDR policy that treats emission reductions and removals as fungible, and (3) proactive CDR policy entrepreneurship with support for niche development. Although these types do not necessarily cover all dimensions relevant for CDR policy and are based on a limited set of cases, the conceptual typology might spur future comparative work as well as more fine-grained case-studies on established and emerging CDR policies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Lezaun ◽  
Peter Healey ◽  
Tim Kruger ◽  
Stephen M. Smith

This Policy Brief reviews the experience of the UK in developing principles for the governance of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) at scale. Early discussions on CDR governance took place in two separate and somewhat disjointed policy domains: forestry, on the one hand, and R&D support for novel “geoengineering” technologies, on the other. The adoption by the UK government of a 2050 “net zero” target is forcing an integration of these disparate perspectives, and should lead to a more explicit articulation of the role CDR is expected to play in UK climate strategy. This need for clarification is revealing some of underlying tensions and divisions in public views on CDR, particularly when it comes to forms of capture and sequestration deemed to be “non-natural.” We propose some principles to ensure that the development and deployment of carbon dioxide removal at scale strengthens a commitment to ambitious climate change mitigation and can thus enjoy broad public support.


2019 ◽  
Vol 152 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 345-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly S. Wolske ◽  
Kaitlin T. Raimi ◽  
Victoria Campbell-Arvai ◽  
P. Sol Hart

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Bright ◽  
Micky Allen ◽  
Clara Anton-Fernandez ◽  
Lise Dalsgaard ◽  
Stephanie Eisner ◽  
...  

<p>As a carbon dioxide removal measure, the Norwegian government is currently considering a policy of large-scale planting of spruce (<em>Picea abies</em> (L) H. Karst) on non-forested lands (i.e., aff-/reforestation) and secondary forested lands dominated by early successional broadleaved tree species (i.e., improved forest management).  Given the need to achieve net zero emissions in the latter half of the 21<sup>st</sup> century in effort to limit the global mean temperature rise to “well below” 2 °C, the mitigation potential of such a policy is unclear given relatively slow tree growth rates in the region.  Further convoluting the picture is the magnitude and relevance of surface albedo changes linked to such projects, which typically counter the benefits of an enhanced forest CO<sub>2</sub> sink in high latitude regions.  Here, we carry out a rigorous empirical assessment of the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potential of large-scale aff-/reforestation (AR) and improved forest management (IFM) projects in Norway, taking into account transient developments in both terrestrial carbon sinks and surface albedo over the 21<sup>st</sup> century and beyond.  We find that surface albedo changes would likely play a negligible role in counteracting the carbon cycle benefit of tCDR, yet given slow forest growth rates in the region, meaningful tCDR benefits from AR and IFM projects would not be realized until the end of the 21<sup>st</sup> century, with maximum benefits occurring around 2150.  We estimate Norway’s total accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 and 2150 (including surface albedo changes) to be 447 (± 240) and 852 (± 295) Mt CO<sub>2</sub>-eq. at mean costs of US$ 29 (± 18) and US$ 26 (± 14) per ton CDR, respectively.  For perspective, the accumulated tCDR potential at 2100 represents around 8 years of Norway’s total current annual production-based (i.e., territorial) CO<sub>2</sub>-eq. emissions.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document