Rethinking standards of permanence for terrestrial and coastal carbon: implications for governance and sustainability

Ruseva, Tatyana B.; Hedrick, J. C.; Marland, Gregg; Tovar, Henning; Sabou, Carina; Besombes, Elia

doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2020.09.009

Cited by 32 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Data-constrained modelling suggests that the zonally-averaged mean time from deep seafloor remineralization to re-exposure to the atmosphere ranges between 700–900 years in the North Atlantic 39 , where GASB biomass is deposited 38 , and increases further along the global conveyor belt to >1400 years in the North Pacific 39 . These timescales are generally longer than those considered for some land-based CDR methods like terrestrial afforestation or soil carbon sequestration, which are on the order of decades to a century 36 , 40 . Nevertheless, the systematic differences reveal that some locations are better suited for seafloor deposition of seaweed biomass than others.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Seafloor deposition may be associated with less process-related offsets to CDR theoretical , when the deep sea is adjacent to the afforestation site. The value of geological and sea floor deposition depends upon a yet to be established policy framework that needs to clarify how sequestration permanence is factored into a carbon price, and how stringently CO 2 leakage back into the atmosphere must be monitored 36 . Geological sequestration in appropriate formations can be considered long-term with a 66–90% chance of less than 1% CO 2 leakage over 1000 years and possibly beyond 37 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing the climate intervention potential of ocean afforestation using the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring that global warming remains <2 °C requires rapid CO2 emissions reduction. Additionally, 100–900 gigatons CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere by 2100 using a portfolio of CO2 removal (CDR) methods. Ocean afforestation, CDR through basin-scale seaweed farming in the open ocean, is seen as a key component of the marine portfolio. Here, we analyse the CDR potential of recent re-occurring trans-basin belts of the floating seaweed Sargassum in the (sub)tropical North Atlantic as a natural analogue for ocean afforestation. We show that two biogeochemical feedbacks, nutrient reallocation and calcification by encrusting marine life, reduce the CDR efficacy of Sargassum by 20–100%. Atmospheric CO2 influx into the surface seawater, after CO2-fixation by Sargassum, takes 2.5–18 times longer than the CO2-deficient seawater remains in contact with the atmosphere, potentially hindering CDR verification. Furthermore, we estimate that increased ocean albedo, due to floating Sargassum, could influence climate radiative forcing more than Sargassum-CDR. Our analysis shows that multifaceted Earth-system feedbacks determine the efficacy of ocean afforestation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the climate intervention potential of ocean afforestation using the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Emission reductions are innately permanent and do not face a risk of reversal. Policy instruments need to account for such differences in order to be compatible with net-zero ambitions, by differentiating results based on their permanence levels [e.g., recognizing temporary removals without relying on them in the long term; Ruseva et al (2020)] or limiting their role within mitigation targets by further enhancing the pace and scale of emissions reductions accordingly.…”

Section: Differentiation Needed Based On Cdr Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…A land-based system that transitions to a new management regime that is reasonable to continue for even as little as 10-15 years that results in retaining and removing carbon can provide significant value to the atmosphere and to a buyer in a VCM. It should not be required that VCM project developers seek administrative maneuverings or questionable or eccentric science to prove 100 years of permanence (Ruseva et al, 2020).…”

Section: Permanencementioning

confidence: 99%

The Good Is Never Perfect: Why the Current Flaws of Voluntary Carbon Markets Are Services, Not Barriers to Successful Climate Change Action

Miltenberger

Jospe²,

Pittman

2021

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world's current level of climate change action does not match its ambitions to tackle the issue, and its ambitions do not currently meet the levels of action science recommends. Voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) are one option proposed to lessen those disparities, and have been both criticized and championed by various groups. Critiques note them as being opaque, flawed, and ineffective. Yet they demonstrate tremendous potential for impact and unprecedented levels of finance. We contend that the critiques of these markets are not only resolvable, but are unavoidable challenges that must be addressed on the path to mobilizing climate change ambition and achieving targets. Furthermore, we believe that by 2050, the current discrete market-based solutions in climate action will become internalized aspects of our economies rather than separate remediations. This goal of internalizing the externalities that cause climate change will result in massive, sustained decarbonization, rapid reorganization of global economies, and an extraordinary push to invent, solve, and scale strategies that facilitate the transition. Pricing carbon is a key contemporary step for transitioning to that future. Voluntary carbon markets are one means to catalyze this action and while needing improvements, should be given appropriate leeway to improve and fulfill that role.

show abstract

Rethinking standards of permanence for terrestrial and coastal carbon: implications for governance and sustainability

Cited by 32 publications

References 71 publications

Testing the climate intervention potential of ocean afforestation using the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

Testing the climate intervention potential of ocean afforestation using the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

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

The Good Is Never Perfect: Why the Current Flaws of Voluntary Carbon Markets Are Services, Not Barriers to Successful Climate Change Action

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About