Schlagwort: CDR

Policy Brief: Build Carbon Removal Reserve to Secure Future of EU Emissions Trading

by Wilfried Rickels, Mathias Fridahl, Roland Rothenstein, Felix Schenuit, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, May 2024

Transforming an existing ETS that covers gross emissions into a net-emissions system that covers both emissions and removals and introducing a net-zero cap followed by a net-negative cap, poses the challenges of ensuring that the market remains operational and that the policy objectives underlying the ETS are maintained during the transition period. The EU faces this dual challenge. Delpla and Gollier (2019), Rickels, Proelß, et al. (2021), Rickels, Rothenstein, et al. (2022), and Edenhofer et al. (2024) propose introducing a Carbon Central Bank (CCB) to manage the inclusion of CRC trading and the transformation of the existing EU ETS into a net-zero and then net-negative ETS.

LINK

Otto & Matzner (2024): Let Us Get Regional: Exploring Prospects for Biomass-Based Carbon Dioxide Removal on the Ground

Danny Otto, Nils Matzner IN: Journal of Carbon Research, https://doi.org/10.3390/c10010025

This paper aims to address this research gap by comparatively examining the development of biomass-based CDR in three regions of Germany. Taking an exploratory approach, we conducted surveys in these regions to gain insight into stakeholder perceptions of the following six CDR methods: forest management, agriculture and soil carbon, long-lasting building materials, rewetting of peatlands and paludiculture, biochar, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. In this article, the authors present the results of the stakeholder survey, which offers multiple perspectives that can shape future studies of regional implementation and yield policy-relevant guidance. Although the research primarily focuses on the regional level in Germany, it sheds light on various conflicts, uncertainties, and potentials that are likely to be relevant for the rollout of CDR in other countries.

LINK

Nature – Mendez et al. (2024): Assessing global urban CO2 removal

Quirina Rodriguez Mendez, Sabine Fuss, Sarah Lück, Felix Creutzig IN: Nature Cities, https://doi.org/10.1038/s44284-024-00069-x

Here, with the aim of supporting the path to achieving net-zero emissions in cities, the authors assess the existing literature on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) at the urban scale, seeking to quantify the potential negative emissions contribution of cities globally. Urban CDR options considered here include the storage of carbon in urban vegetation, soils and buildings, and the capture of CO2 from indoor environments via decentralized direct air capture. Our estimates of carbon storage and capture potentials indicate that deploying CDR options at the urban scale could make a substantial contribution to global mitigation of climate change, alongside supporting the upscaling of climate action from local to regional and national scale. 

LINK

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) 2024-2044: Technologies, Players, Carbon Credit Markets, and Forecasts

Eve Pope, ITTechEx Research, April 2024

This report provides a comprehensive outlook of the emerging CDR industry and carbon credit markets, with an in-depth analysis of the technological, economic, regulatory, and environmental aspects that are shaping this market. In it, IDTechEx focuses on technologies that actively draw CO₂ from the atmosphere and sequester it into carbon sinks, namely: Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), Biomass with carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) including approaches such as BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage), biochar, biomass burial, and bio-oil underground injection, Land-based CDR methods, i.e. afforestation and reforestation and soil carbon sequestration techniques, Mineralization NETs that enhance natural mineral processes and Ocean-based CDR methods.

LINK

Plan Sea: Ocean Interventions to Address Climate Change

podcast by Wil Burns & Anna Medlener (Institute for Carbon Removal Law & Policy, American University), 1h

In this episode Lennart Bach, at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, and Veronica Tamsitt, Head of Oceanography at the mCDR MRV company, Submarine, discuss some of the most pertinent issues to assessing the potential role of Ocean Iron Fertilization (OIF) in a marine CDR portfolio, including costs, risks, and legal considerations.

LINK

Abegg et al. (2024): Expert Insights into Future Trajectories: Assessing Cost Reductions and Scalability of Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies

Manon Abegg, Zeynep Clulow, Lucrezia Nava, David M. Reiner IN: Frontiers in Climate, doi:10.3389/fclim.2024.1331901

This study explores the future costs and scalability of DACCS and BECCS to advance net-zero goals. The authors analyze expert opinions on these technologies‘ potential costs and deployment scales for 2030, 2040, and 2050. Data was collected from 34 experts, comprising 21 DACCS and 13 BECCS specialists. They provided 90% confidence interval estimates and ‚best estimates‘ for future costs and deployment under two International Energy Agency (IEA) policy scenarios -Stated Policies (STEPS) and Net Zero Emissions by 2050 (NZE).

LINK

Nature – Prütz et al. (2024): A taxonomy to map evidence on the co-benefits, challenges, and limits of carbon dioxide removal

Ruben Prütz, Sabine Fuss, Sarah Lück, Leon Stephan, Joeri Rogelj IN: Communications Earth & Environment, 5, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01365-z

Recent exponential growth in literature is rapidly filling this gap but makes the synthesis of the evidence on carbon dioxide removal side effects increasingly challenging. Here the authors address this issue by mapping this literature and proposing a taxonomy to synthesize and compare evidence on carbon dioxide removal side effects. The expansive evidence warrants the use of machine learning to systematically select relevant research and provide an inventory of nearly 400 co-benefits, challenges, and limits.

LINK

Exploring Durability Curves — An Enhanced Lens for Evaluating Carbon Removals

by Rick Berg, Radhika Moolgavkar, Nori, March 26, 2024

„The durability of sequestered carbon, and credits designed to represent it, has gotten a lot of focus in discussions around the voluntary carbon dioxide removal (CDR) markets and emerging mandatory carbon markets. This attention is well-deserved. Durability characteristics play a key role in the functioning of the markets, including how the carbon removal credits are used, the development of carbon insurance, the management of carbon credit portfolio risks, and the creation of credit ratings. „

LINK

Nature – Zhao et al. (2024): Trade-offs in land-based carbon removal measures under 1.5°C and 2°C futures

Xin Zhao, Bryan K. Mignone, Marshall A. Wise, Haewon C. McJeon IN: Nature Communications, 15, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-46575-3

Land-based carbon removals, specifically afforestation/reforestation and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), vary widely in 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios generated by integrated assessment models. Because underlying drivers are difficult to assess, the authors use a well-known integrated assessment model, GCAM, to demonstrate that land-based carbon removals are sensitive to the strength and scope of land-based mitigation policies. 

LINK

Chapter: Lukas Schuett (2024): Permanence and Liability: Legal Considerations on the Integration of Carbon Dioxide Removal into the EU Emissions Trading System

Lukas Schuett IN: Transnational Environmental Law, https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102524000013

This article examines how carbon dioxide (CO2) removal credits can be integrated into the European Union (EU) Emissions Trading System (ETS), focusing on questions of permanence and climate liability. It identifies challenges within the integration process and analyzes approaches from practice and literature to cultivate learning. These approaches apply different strategies to address the issue of permanence, including temporary credit issuance, granting credits once a certain number of carbon tonne-years have been accumulated, or issuing credits at the beginning of the project period and relying on liability instead. Drawing from the findings of this research, the article presents legal considerations that may inform a proposal for an EU legislative act on the integration of carbon removal credits into the EU ETS.

LINK