Five principles for robust carbon dioxide removal policy in the G7 DOI
Felix Schenuit, Oliver Geden, Glen P. Peters

et al.

One Earth, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 7(9), P. 1487 - 1491

Published: Sept. 1, 2024

Language: Английский

Navigating stakeholder heterogeneity in carbon dioxide removal governance DOI Creative Commons
Yuwan Malakar, Kerryn Brent,

A.A. Bester

et al.

Published: Jan. 15, 2025

Citations

1
Bargaining powers in cooperative Carbon Dioxide Removal deployment DOI Creative Commons
Emma Jagu Schippers, Solène Chiquier, Olivier Massol

et al.

Climate Policy, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 1 - 16

Published: Jan. 16, 2025

International cooperation has the potential to significantly reduce costs of implementing Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) in line with Paris Agreement. However, success interregional depends on whether a satisfying agreement can be reached. Regional bargaining powers may heavily influence outcome such an agreement. This paper uses cooperative game theory assess deployment CDR between United States (US), European Union (EU), Brazil, and China. We compute least-costly pathways under multiple configurations using Modelling Optimisation Negative Emissions Technologies (MONET) framework, assuming regional targets that are proportional greenhouse gas emissions. Then, we apply derive relative from cost evaluations MONET. find lead substantial reductions, ranging 11% 43%. Furthermore, identify two distinct types regions possess considerable power: (1) minimal historical responsibility towards climate change but abundant resources for implementation (exemplified by Brazil this study); (2) limited domestic amidst large (represented either USA or China, here). These findings illustrate leverage certain Global South could wield collaborative Article 6

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Review of Economics and Policies of Carbon Dioxide Removal DOI Creative Commons
So‐Young Oh, Jenna Greene, Matthias Honegger

et al.

Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: 12(1)

Published: March 7, 2025

Abstract Purpose of review Despite the increasing political attention and support, high costs many carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies remain a barrier to their large-scale deployment. We provide an overview economics for two key CDR options – BECCS DACCS proposed existing policies address “CDR gap” in achieving long-term temperature goals Paris Agreement. Summary Although we lack detailed cost breakdowns actual projects, our suggests that range is generally lower than DACCS. The parameter sustainability biomass feedstock, energy intensity. Recent Findings Cost estimates have increased due experiences from commercial operation, they are increasingly differentiated according feedstock.

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Who cares about carbon dioxide removal? Assessing actors, policy positions, and participation modes within European and United Nations public consultation processes DOI Creative Commons
Lucilla Losi, Livia Fritz, Benjamin K. Sovacool

et al.

Climate Policy, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 1 - 16

Published: April 4, 2025

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Carbon Sequestration and Rhizoremediation: Strategies for Managing Xenobiotic Compounds and Restoring Ecological Balance to Mitigate Climate Change DOI
Nandita Das, Piyush Pandey

Microorganisms for sustainability, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 275 - 311

Published: Jan. 1, 2025

Language: Английский

Citations

0
Five principles for robust carbon dioxide removal policy in the G7 DOI
Felix Schenuit, Oliver Geden, Glen P. Peters

et al.

One Earth, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 7(9), P. 1487 - 1491

Published: Sept. 1, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

0