Search Climate Insights Directory

The report highlights that AFOLU emissions account for 46% of total emissions in Latin America, primarily due to livestock and commodity agriculture. It argues that while significant investment enters the region, very little is directed toward sustainable alternatives. The document advocates for redirecting foreign capital and public support toward innovative solutions such as alternative proteins and biochar to meet climate and development goals.

A coalition of organizations urges the US government to maintain conservation funding, expand research into biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS), and accelerate the USDA's adoption of new conservation practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve soil carbon.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) have provided unprecedented funding for both technological and natural carbon dioxide removal (CDR) in the U.S. The BIL focuses on infrastructure, including $3.5 billion for four regional Direct Air Capture (DAC) Hubs and billions for CO2 transport and storage. The IRA enhances these efforts through an expanded 45Q tax credit, offering up to $180/tCO2 for geologically sequestered DAC, and allocates billions for climate-smart agriculture and forestry, such as $8.45 billion for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). Together, these laws support the full lifecycle of carbon capture and ecosystem restoration to help the U.S. reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

The policy brief examines the impact of high-severity wildfires on the U.S. forest carbon sink, noting that forests in several Western states have become net carbon emitters. It advocates for scaling up 'fuel load treatments'—such as prescribed burns and mechanical removal of biomass—to mitigate wildfire risk and suggests developing markets for thinned biomass (e.g., biochar, green hydrogen) to fund these efforts and reduce emissions. The brief calls for federal policy support via the 2023 Farm Bill to increase research, support rural and Tribal communities, and incentivize innovative wood products.

The land sector is essential for 1.5°C and 2°C pathways, potentially providing up to 30% of global mitigation. While it offers significant near-term potential at low cost, the IPCC warns that land-based mitigation cannot compensate for delayed emissions reductions in other sectors. Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is deemed necessary for net-zero targets, but the IPCC highlights substantial uncertainties, risks, and a massive investment gap, with current annual investment at USD 0.7 billion against a needed USD 400 billion.

The report identifies significant gaps in the monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) infrastructure for carbon dioxide removal (CDR), noting that existing frameworks are primarily designed for emission reductions rather than removals. It highlights inconsistencies in how permanence, system boundaries, and additionality are treated across different voluntary and compliance standards. The authors recommend the development of dedicated methodologies for Direct Air Capture (DAC) and Bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), the adoption of dynamic baselines aligned with Paris Agreement targets, and a standardized approach to defining 'permanent' storage to prevent the overestimation of mitigation results.

The report argues that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) should be treated as a public service, similar to sewage treatment, because most CDR technologies do not generate independent revenue. It identifies a massive implementation gap between projected removal volumes and current policies, noting that while nature-based solutions are cheaper, they lack the permanence of technological options like Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) and Bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). The authors recommend a mix of public subsidies for research, design, development and demonstration (RDD&D), carbon pricing, and the use of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement to create a credible investment environment. It also highlights the role of voluntary private sector commitments, though it warns of a 'wild west' situation in the voluntary carbon market due to inconsistent monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) standards.

The report details the results of the BONUS RETURN project, which identified and evaluated ecotechnologies for recovering nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon from wastewater and agriculture in the Baltic Sea Region. While agricultural waste recovery often showed positive net present value, wastewater technologies typically required expensive infrastructure, leading to negative net present values. The project emphasizes that transitioning to a circular nutrient economy requires shifting away from linear 'silo' thinking, harmonizing EU regulations for phosphorus, and adjusting fertilizer pricing to account for environmental externalities.

The document analyzes strategies for scaling Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) to meet IPCC 1.5°C goals. It recommends supporting biological CDR through domestic regulation rather than carbon markets due to non-permanence risks, and suggests targeted R&D and pilot support for technological CDR (BECCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, and mineral carbonation). Crucially, it argues that separate targets for emissions and removals are superior to combined net-zero targets to prevent the diversion of attention from essential emission reductions and to prepare for a future net-negative CO2 phase.

The 2020 Drawdown Report argues that the world can reach the Drawdown point by the mid-2040s if existing climate solutions are deployed with high ambition. The analysis categorizes 76 solutions into three primary areas: reducing emissions sources (electricity, food/agriculture, industry, transport, and buildings), strengthening natural carbon sinks (terrestrial, coastal, and oceanic), and improving society through health and education. The report emphasizes that these solutions are interconnected and that the net operational savings significantly outweigh the implementation costs, with estimated savings of 95.1–145.5 trillion USD against implementation costs of 22.5–28.4 trillion USD.

The report identifies 76 climate solutions categorized into reducing emission sources, reinforcing carbon sinks, and improving social equity. It argues that the world can reach the Drawdown point by the mid-2040s if existing solutions are scaled rapidly, noting that the net operational savings of these solutions outweigh implementation costs by four to five times. Key high-impact solutions include reducing food waste, improving health and education, and transitioning to renewable energy like wind and solar. The document emphasizes that these solutions are interconnected and require 'accelerators' such as policy changes and capital shifts to achieve the necessary scale and speed.

The report outlines opportunities for industrial symbiosis in two Cape Town industrial zones. In Montague Gardens, it highlights the reuse of boiler ash in brick making, the need for treated wood waste solutions, and the potential to shift freight from road to rail. In Atlantis, it identifies opportunities for reusing foundry sand and ash, recovering precious metals from e-waste, and investing in waste-to-energy infrastructure such as pyrolysis and gasification plants. The document argues that establishing a central management body and fostering collaboration on shared services and material exchanges are essential for building business resilience and creating low-carbon zones.

The report evaluates the economic viability of various eco-technologies in the Fyrisån (Sweden), Słupia (Poland), and Vantaanjoki (Finland) river basins using a combined Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) approach. It finds that most technologies currently yield a negative net present value (NPV) due to high investment costs, with the notable exceptions of anaerobic digestion and thermal treatment in the Vantaanjoki basin.

The document emphasizes that achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 requires increasing the capacity of global carbon sinks through land-use management. Drawing on an IPCC special report, it identifies four high-potential mitigation categories: BECCS, reforestation/forest restoration, afforestation, and biochar. The author advocates for a 'portfolio' approach tailored to regional conditions, particularly in tropical and subtropical areas, while warning that high land demand could pressure food prices and biodiversity. Key success factors include prioritizing optimal biomass conversion, developing multifunctional landscapes, ensuring fair community participation, prioritizing the avoidance of deforestation, and increasing R&D for biochar and BECCS.

The report reviews 819 studies on ecotechnologies for nutrient recovery in the Baltic Sea Region, finding that while energy recovery is mature in wastewater and manure-based systems dominate agriculture, economic viability is heavily dependent on global market prices for phosphate rock and natural gas. It argues that current EU policies remain rooted in linear waste management and calls for harmonized regulations to promote a circular economy for nutrients.

The report evaluates different systems for nutrient and carbon recovery in the Vantaanjoki (Finland), Fyrisån (Sweden), and Słupia (Poland) catchment areas. Using a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) involving stakeholder weighting, the study compares baseline management against alternatives such as anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis, and source-separation. In Vantaanjoki, anaerobic digestion scored highest. In Fyrisån, source-separation was the most sustainable. In Słupia, nutrient extraction performed best, while source-separation was found to be potentially less sustainable than the baseline due to local context and low adoption rates.

The document examines the reciprocal relationship between climate and land in Africa, highlighting how desertification and land degradation exacerbate food insecurity and poverty. It identifies specific risks for arid zones, the disproportionate impact on women and marginalized groups, and proposes integrated governance and sustainable land management practices to build resilience.

The report examines how Carbon Removal and Solar Geoengineering might interact with the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. It finds that at least 13 of the 17 SDGs would be affected by these technologies, with at least 9 facing significant risks. While these interventions could mitigate some climate-driven threats to development, they introduce novel physical, socio-economic, and political risks, including land-use conflicts, water scarcity, and international political tensions. The authors emphasize substantial knowledge gaps and call for transdisciplinary, geographically diverse research and robust global governance to ensure such technologies do not hinder sustainable development.

The agriculture and land sectors (AFOLU) contribute approximately 24% of total GHG emissions, but also sequester about one third of annual anthropogenic emissions. While technical potentials for mitigation are high—with some estimates suggesting up to 23.8 GtCO2e yr-1 through conservation and restoration—significant uncertainties remain regarding the persistence of carbon sinks and the practical implementation of large-scale removals. Achieving Paris Agreement goals requires a combination of reducing deforestation, sustainable land intensification, and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies, though these are often hindered by institutional, economic, and socio-cultural barriers rather than just technical limitations.

The report presents five scenarios demonstrating that global warming can be limited to well below 2 C° if the world leverages exponential technological improvements and S-curve market diffusion. It highlights that experts often underestimate the speed of energy transitions by ignoring learning rates and systemic feedbacks. The proposed pathways involve reducing energy demand by approximately 60% through efficiency and electrification, shifting the electricity supply to over 90% renewables by 2040 in aggressive scenarios, and transforming agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU) into a net carbon sink by the mid-2040s.