Search Climate Insights Directory

This report by the NewClimate Institute examines the increasing prevalence of net-zero emissions targets among companies, cities, and regions, highlighting how ambiguities in implementation approaches can obscure actual ambition and the need for greater transparency to ensure accountability.

This research paper by the NewClimate Institute examines policy frameworks for upscaling Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) while ensuring that such efforts do not detract from greenhouse gas emissions reductions. The authors analyze various CDR approaches, their development stages, and the risks associated with using offsetting schemes, ultimately advocating for the separation of emission reduction targets from removal targets.

In this statement, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) defends its report 'Fuel to the Fire' against criticisms from geoengineering advocate Jesse Reynolds. CIEL argues that fossil fuel companies and climate denialists have disproportionately influenced the promotion of geoengineering technologies to delay the phase-out of fossil fuels and avoid aggressive emission reductions.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law examines the fossil fuel industry's involvement in the development and promotion of geoengineering technologies, arguing that these strategies are used to justify the continued use of carbon-intensive fuels and avoid systemic change.

This policy brief, published in November 2011 by UNESCO, SCOPE, and UNEP, examines the scientific, policy, and ethical implications of geoengineering (climate engineering). It distinguishes between carbon geoengineering and solar geoengineering, outlines a four-stage research framework, and highlights the urgent need for an international governance framework to manage the risks and equities associated with large-scale climate manipulation.

This working paper examines the international governance of technological carbon removal, focusing on three main challenges: mitigation deterrence, equity in deployment and benefits, and the lack of standardized measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) processes. It notes that while 26 of 62 LTSs submitted to the UNFCCC as of May 2023 consider technological CDR, there is little guidance on how to scale these technologies equitably and sustainably to meet the 1.5 degrees C goal of the Paris Agreement.

This briefing from the World Resources Institute outlines policy recommendations for the United States to maintain its leadership in the development and deployment of carbon dioxide removal technologies to complement emissions reductions.

This research paper analyzes the current state of measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) for novel carbon dioxide removal (CDR) within U.S. federal policy, arguing that existing requirements are inconsistent and recommending the establishment of a centralized federal MRV function based on seven guiding principles.

This report examines seven ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) approaches, advocating for an informed and responsible deployment strategy that balances the urgency of reaching net-zero emissions to limit warming to 1.5°C against the scientific uncertainties and environmental and social risks associated with these technologies.

This appendix from the IPCC Working Group III report provides a detailed technical summary of various Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) methods, comparing their technology readiness levels (TRL), costs, mitigation potentials, and associated risks and co-benefits.