Companies' role in scaling durable carbon dioxide removals

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The report argues that only durable CDR, which stores carbon for millennia, can effectively neutralise residual fossil fuel emissions, yet private sector uptake remains low and concentrated among a few tech companies. It warns that some firms use CDR to avoid deep emission reductions and notes a lack of transparency regarding the social and environmental impacts of supported projects. The document recommends that governments regulate CDR and that voluntary standards require companies to set separate targets for emission reductions and durable CDR support.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Durable CDR is the only effective method for neutralising residual fossil fuel emissions because CO2 remains in the atmosphere for millennia.
  • Non-durable CDR, such as reforestation, is considered unsuitable for neutralising biogenic emissions due to unreliable reporting, land limitations, and risks to ecosystem health and biodiversity.
  • Private sector adoption of durable CDR is currently very low and highly concentrated, with Microsoft accounting for more than two-thirds of all contracted durable CDR. To meet global net-zero goals, capacity and demand must increase 1,000-fold by 2050.
  • Some companies, particularly in the tech sector, use durable and non-durable CDR to meet net-zero targets instead of pursuing feasible deep emission reductions, which undermines global net-zero efforts.
  • There is a significant lack of transparency regarding the environmental and social integrity of CDR projects; none of the 35 companies assessed provided sufficient information to evaluate risks such as biodiversity loss or competition with food production.
  • The report recommends that durable CDR be treated as a public good and that voluntary standards, such as ISO and SBTi, require companies to set separate monetary and quantitative targets for emission reductions and durable CDR support.

Cite the original document

APA
NewClimate Institute (2025). Companies' role in scaling durable carbon dioxide removals. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/companies-role-in-scaling-durable-carbon-dioxide-removals
Chicago
NewClimate Institute. Companies' role in scaling durable carbon dioxide removals. 2025. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/companies-role-in-scaling-durable-carbon-dioxide-removals.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=NewClimate Institute |title=Companies' role in scaling durable carbon dioxide removals |date=9 September 2025 |url=http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/companies-role-in-scaling-durable-carbon-dioxide-removals |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{newclimateinstitute2025companies, author = {{NewClimate Institute}}, title = {{Companies' role in scaling durable carbon dioxide removals}}, institution = {NewClimate Institute}, year = {2025}, month = sep, url = {http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/companies-role-in-scaling-durable-carbon-dioxide-removals}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated