Targeting carbon dioxide removal in the European Union

Abstract

In principle, many climate policymakers have accepted that large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement's mitigation targets, but they have avoided proposing by whom CDR might be delivered. Given its role in international climate policy, the European Union (EU) might be expected to lead the way. But among EU climate policymakers so far there is little talk on CDR, let alone action. Here we assess how best to 'target' CDR to motivate EU policymakers exploring which CDR target strategy may work best to start dealing with CDR on a meaningful scale. A comprehensive CDR approach would focus on delivering the CDR volumes required from the EU by 2100, approximately at least 50 Gigatonnes (Gt) CO 2 , according to global model simulations aiming to keep warming below 2°C. A limited CDR approach would focus on an intermediate target to deliver the CDR needed to reach 'net zero emissions' (i.e. the gross negative emissions needed to offset residual positive emissions that are too expensive or even impossible to mitigate). We argue that a comprehensive CDR approach may be too intimidating for EU policymakers. A limited CDR approach that only addresses the necessary steps to reach the (intermediate) target of 'net zero emissions' is arguably more achievable, since it is a better match to the existing policy paradigm and would allow for a pragmatic phase-in of CDR while avoiding outright resistance by environmental NGOs and the broader public. Key policy insights. Making CDR an integral part of EU climate policy has the potential to significantly reshape the policy landscape.. Burden sharing considerations would probably play a major role, with comprehensive CDR prolonging the disparity and tensions between progressives and laggards.. Introducing limited CDR in the context of 'net zero' pathways would retain a visible primary focus on decarbonization but acknowledge the need for a significant enhancement of removals via 'natural' and/or 'engineered' sinks.. A decarbonization approach that intends to lead to a low level of 'residual emissions' (to be tackled by a pragmatic phase-in of CDR) should be the priority of EU climate policy.

Beyond Social Acceptability: Applying Lessons from CCS Social Science to Support Deployment of BECCS

“…Here, language and framing become important; if CDR becomes part of the net zero framing, rather than as a conventional 'offsetting' measure, it can become part of a wider, more integrated, and fully accounted strategy. There is a strong case for pursuing BECCS as part of the route to net zero CO 2 , enabling a focus on decarbonisation, reducing the mitigation deterrent potential and working with current policy paradigms [49,79]. With many questions unanswered around the potential role for CCS/BECCS, there is a huge potential for social science to guide the path towards more sustainable climate futures.…”

“…Afforestation and BECCS are the two primary CDR approaches currently represented in integrated assessment models (IAMs) which inform the IPCC on pathways to deliver Paris temperature goals. The central role for CDR in achieving both the 1.5°C and the 2°C ambition introduces a new imperative to establish CCS as part of a sociotechnical imaginary [48] in which the policy aspiration of 'net zero' plays an important role in the framing and implementation of CCS, BECCS (and other CDR), technologies [49,50].…”

“…A recent special issue on the politics and governance of 'negative emission technologies' explores wide-ranging issues in this field [78], including the potential for mitigation deterrence [57•, 75] and the need to develop policies which mitigate against direct or indirect impacts to social and natural systems, paying attention to equity and justice, particularly in the context of the potentially significant role of developing countries [44,60]. Geden and Scott et al argue that largescale 'comprehensive' CO 2 removal challenges current lowcarbon policies at an EU level, suggesting that a more 'limited' role in delivering 'net zero' emissions in the coming decades is likely to gain more traction than a longer-term 'net negative' framing [49,50,79,80].…”

A new scenario logic for the Paris Agreement long-term temperature goal

“…Furthermore, concerns do not only have to apply to the availability of certain technological options in the second half of the century, but can also apply to the pace and timing of their scale up over the next decades. Even to achieve global net zero CO2 emissions, scenarios often use sizeable amounts of CDR that require technologies to be scaled up well before the point global net zero CO2 emissions are achieved 29,[52][53][54] (Extended Data Figs and 3). An illustrative overview of these and other concerns is provided in Extended Data Table 2 together with a suggestion of how they could be explored as part of the scenario framework presented here.…”

Fossil Natural Gas Exit – A New Narrative for the European Energy Transformation towards Decarbonization

“…scenarios of the IPCC but also in this area, implementation cannot be observed (IPCC 2018) and hardly found in the political agenda (Geden, Peters, and Scott 2019).…”