Three basics for the EU to get CDR right
on Bellona Europa.org
In the context of the EU’s Carbon Removal Certification Mechanism, Bellona suggests 3 basics that should guide the EU’s approach to CDR.
Schlagwort: governance
Sovacool et al. (2022): Risk–risk governance in a low-carbon future: Exploring institutional, technological, and behavioral tradeoffs in climate geoengineering pathways
Benjamin K. Sovacool, Chad M. Baum, Sean Low IN: Risk Analysis, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13932
In this study, the authors utilize a large and novel set of qualitative expert interview data to more deeply and systematically explore the types of risk–risk tradeoffs that may emerge from the use of 20 different climate geoengineering options, 10 that focus on carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas removal, and 10 that focus on solar radiation management and reflecting sunlight.
Questionaire: Carbon Market Watch reply to European Commission public consultation on the certification of carbon removals – EU rules
on Carbonmarketwatch.com
„This public consultation invites public administrations, academic institutions, businesses, organisations and individuals to contribute to the preparation of an EU regulatory framework for the certification of carbon removals. The findings of the consultation (which will be summarised and published) will inform the impact assessment accompanying the Commission proposal on this initiative.“
Burke & Gambhir (2022): Policy incentives for Greenhouse Gas Removal Techniques: the risks of premature inclusion in carbon markets and the need for a multi-pronged policy framework
Joshua Burke and Ajay Gambhir IN: Energy and Climate Change, 100074, 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2022.100074
Here the authors identify three risks associated with using carbon markets as the sole, or main, policy lever to encourage the deployment of GGR (Greenhouse Gas Removal) techniques. The categorisation of risks stems from discussions with policymakers in the UK and a review of the broader literature on carbon markets and GGR.
Regional Carbon Management Applicant Education Workshop
April, 13, 19 and 26, 2022
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (DOE-FECM) is announcing the first of three in-person Regional Carbon Management Applicant Education Workshops, to be held at the Hyatt Regency Columbus, Ohio. This three week series of in-person, day-long workshops will bring together stakeholders of large-scale Carbon Management-related infrastructure projects. Following Columbus, in-person events will be held in New Orleans, LA on April 19th; and Salt Lake City, UT on April 26th.
Schaller et al. (2022): Atmospheric CO2 as a resource for renewable energy production: A European energy law appraisal of direct air capture fuels
Romina Schaller, Till Markus, Klaas Korte, Erik Gawel IN: Reciel (Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law), 2022, 1-10, https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12434
In this article, the authors examine European Union legislation, focusing on the Renewable Energy Directive, and conclude that DAC fuels can be considered as renewable energy for the transport sector. Moreover, they highlight that the Directive does not yet regulate the methodology that defines the renewable character of DAC fuels and examine relevant criteria to be considered.
The Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act
by Nori – Carbon Removal Newsroom (35 min) on Spotify
In January of 2022, New York Assembly member Patricia Fahy and State Senator Michelle Hinchey introduced the Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act. The proposed legislation aims to use public procurement of carbon removal to help meet the state’s emissions reductions goals by purchasing enough removals to cover the state’s “hard-to-abate” sector’s by 2050- 15% of the state’s 1990 emissions.
Rabitz et al. (2022): A preliminary framework for understanding the governance of novel environmental technologies: Ambiguity, indeterminateness and drift
Florian Rabitz, Marian Feist, Matthias Honegger, Joshua Horton, Sikina Jinnah, Jesse Reynolds IN: Earth System Governance, Volume 12, 100134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2022.100134.
The authors propose a conceptual framework to explain why some technologies are more difficult to govern than others in global environmental governance. They start from the observation that some technologies pose transboundary environmental risks, some provide capacities for managing such risks, and some do both.
Franks et al. (2022): Optimal Pricing for Carbon Dioxide Removal Under Inter-Regional Leakage
Max Franks, Matthias Kalkuhl, Kai Lessmann IN: CEPA Discussion Papers 43, Center for Economic Policy Analysis. DOI: 10.25932/publishup-53808
The authors derive second-best subsidies for CDR when no global carbon price exists but a national government implements a unilateral climate policy. They find that the optimal carbon tax differs from an optimal CDR subsidy because of carbon leakage, terms-of-trade and fossil resource rent dynamics.
Comments on CEQ-Guidance: Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration
CEQ must receive comments by March 18, 2022
Consistent with the Utilizing Significant Emissions with Innovative Technologies (USE IT) Act, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is announcing the availability of and seeking comment on an interim guidance document, “Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration Guidance,” to assist Federal agencies with the regulation and permitting of CCUS activities in the United States.