Who Is Paying for Carbon Dioxide Removal? Designing Policy Instruments for Mobilizing Negative Emissions Technologies

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) poses a significant and complex public policy challenge in the long-term. Presently treated as a marginal aspect of climate policy, addressing CDR as a public good is quickly becoming essential for limiting warming to well below 2 or 1.5°C by achieving net-zero emissions in time – including by mobilization of public and private finance. In this policy and practice review, we develop six functions jointly needed for policy mixes mobilizing CDR in a manner compatible with the Paris Agreement's objectives. We discuss the emerging CDR financing efforts in light of these functions, and we chart a path to a meaningful long-term structuring of policies and financing instruments. CDR characteristics point to the need for up-front capital, continuous funding for scaling, and long-term operating funding streams, as well as differentiation based on permanence of storage and should influence the design of policy instruments. Transparency and early public deliberation are essential for charting a politically stable course of action on CDR, while specific policy designs are being developed in a way that ensures effectiveness, prevents rent-seeking at public expense, and allows for iterative course corrections. We propose a stepwise approach whereby various CDR approaches initially need differentiated treatment based on their differing maturity and cost through R&D pilot activity subsidies. In the longer term, CDR increasingly ought to be funded through mitigation results-oriented financing and included in broader policy instruments. We conclude that CDR needs to become a regularly-provided public service like public waste management has become over the last century.

Download Full-text

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

Energy and Climate Change ◽

10.1016/j.egycc.2021.100043 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 100043

Author(s):

Gokul Iyer ◽

Leon Clarke ◽

Jae Edmonds ◽

Allen Fawcett ◽

Jay Fuhrman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Net Zero

Download Full-text

Biological Parts for Plant Biodesign to Enhance Land-Based Carbon Dioxide Removal

BioDesign Research ◽

10.34133/2021/9798714 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2021 ◽

pp. 1-22

Author(s):

Xiaohan Yang ◽

Degao Liu ◽

Haiwei Lu ◽

David J. Weston ◽

Jin-Gui Chen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Allocation ◽

Value Added ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Grand Challenge ◽

Terrestrial Plants ◽

Long Term Storage ◽

Term Storage

A grand challenge facing society is climate change caused mainly by rising CO2 concentration in Earth’s atmosphere. Terrestrial plants are linchpins in global carbon cycling, with a unique capability of capturing CO2 via photosynthesis and translocating captured carbon to stems, roots, and soils for long-term storage. However, many researchers postulate that existing land plants cannot meet the ambitious requirement for CO2 removal to mitigate climate change in the future due to low photosynthetic efficiency, limited carbon allocation for long-term storage, and low suitability for the bioeconomy. To address these limitations, there is an urgent need for genetic improvement of existing plants or construction of novel plant systems through biosystems design (or biodesign). Here, we summarize validated biological parts (e.g., protein-encoding genes and noncoding RNAs) for biological engineering of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) traits in terrestrial plants to accelerate land-based decarbonization in bioenergy plantations and agricultural settings and promote a vibrant bioeconomy. Specifically, we first summarize the framework of plant-based CDR (e.g., CO2 capture, translocation, storage, and conversion to value-added products). Then, we highlight some representative biological parts, with experimental evidence, in this framework. Finally, we discuss challenges and strategies for the identification and curation of biological parts for CDR engineering in plants.

Download Full-text

Towards net zero CO2 emissions without relying on massive carbon dioxide removal

Sustainability Science ◽

10.1007/s11625-019-00680-1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 (6) ◽

pp. 1739-1743 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Yoichi Kaya ◽

Mitsutsune Yamaguchi ◽

Oliver Geden

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Co2 Emissions ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Net Zero

Download Full-text

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

One Earth ◽

10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.002 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 145-149

Author(s):

Sabine Fuss ◽

Josep G. Canadell ◽

Philippe Ciais ◽

Robert B. Jackson ◽

Chris D. Jones ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Net Zero

Download Full-text

Cancel (Out) Emissions? The Envisaged Role of Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies in Long-Term National Climate Strategies

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.675499 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Alexandra Buylova ◽

Mathias Fridahl ◽

Naghmeh Nasiritousi ◽

Gunilla Reischl

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Climate Mitigation ◽

Low Emission ◽

Climate Action ◽

Removal Technologies ◽

Barriers And Opportunities

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.

Download Full-text

Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.638805 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Felix Schenuit ◽

Rebecca Colvin ◽

Mathias Fridahl ◽

Barry McMullin ◽

Andy Reisinger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Case Studies ◽

National Policy ◽

Analytical Framework ◽

The United States ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

The European Union ◽

Early Integration ◽

Fine Grained ◽

Net Zero

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.

Download Full-text

Path to net zero is critical to climate outcome

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-01639-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Tianyi Sun ◽

Ilissa B. Ocko ◽

Elizabeth Sturcken ◽

Steven P. Hamburg

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Greenhouse Gas ◽

Central Element ◽

Standard Format ◽

Early Action ◽

Net Zero ◽

Climate Action ◽

Nationally Determined Contributions ◽

Gas Targets

AbstractNet zero greenhouse gas targets have become a central element for climate action. However, most company and government pledges focus on the year that net zero is reached, with limited awareness of how critical the emissions pathway is in determining the climate outcome in both the near- and long-term. Here we show that different pathways of carbon dioxide and methane—the most prominent long-lived and short-lived greenhouse gases, respectively—can lead to nearly 0.4 °C of warming difference in midcentury and potential overshoot of the 2 °C target, even if they technically reach global net zero greenhouse gas emissions in 2050. While all paths achieve the Paris Agreement temperature goals in the long-term, there is still a 0.2 °C difference by end-of-century. We find that early action to reduce both emissions of carbon dioxide and methane simultaneously leads to the best climate outcomes over all timescales. We therefore recommend that companies and countries supplement net zero targets with a two-basket set of interim milestones to ensure that early action is taken for both carbon dioxide and methane. A one-basket approach, such as the standard format for Nationally Determined Contributions, is not sufficient because it can lead to a delay in methane mitigation.

Download Full-text

Governing Carbon Dioxide Removal in the UK: Lessons Learned and Challenges Ahead

Frontiers in Climate ◽

10.3389/fclim.2021.673859 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

Author(s):

Javier Lezaun ◽

Peter Healey ◽

Tim Kruger ◽

Stephen M. Smith

Keyword(s):

Carbon Dioxide ◽

Climate Change Mitigation ◽

Public Support ◽

Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Net Zero ◽

The One ◽

The Uk ◽

Public Views ◽

Change Mitigation

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.

Download Full-text