Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that relying solely on voluntary corporate credits is insufficient for scaling CDR and proposes three diversified demand pathways: credit purchasing through government procurement and compliance markets, demand for differentiated low-carbon products enabled by carbon accounting and 'Buy Clean' policies, and 'flipping the script' by funding services where CDR is a co-product, such as wildfire prevention or waste management.

The briefing proposes a 'new carbon economy' to manage carbon as a valuable resource rather than just a waste product. It identifies five core activities—point source capture, carbon dioxide removal, utilization, storage, and transportation—and argues that a lack of coordination between these sectors is currently delaying infrastructure investment and risking the misallocation of resources. The author asserts that a broad coalition of experts and civil society is needed to define a strategic vision for this system to ensure it supports decarbonization without extending the life of fossil fuel power plants.

The document examines Ireland's climate strategy, highlighting a systemic over-reliance on carbon dioxide removals (CDR) and afforestation to bridge gaps in emission reductions. It identifies significant delivery risks for industrial removals like BECCS, which may not be operational until the mid-2030s, and notes that afforestation targets are consistently missed. The report criticizes the lack of transparency regarding residual emissions and the potential for 'temperature neutrality' goals to lower overall climate ambition.

The report details a shift in U.S. federal priorities that has narrowed incentives for clean energy, primarily through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and executive agency actions. It highlights significant tax credit repeals or restrictions, DOE funding cancellations, and EPA reporting rollbacks that have created deep uncertainty across the electric power, manufacturing, and energy and industry sectors. While some investments accelerated to meet new deadlines, others—particularly in hydrogen, sustainable aviation fuel, and carbon management—have declined or relocated abroad.

The report analyzes over 300 advertisements from four oil majors, arguing that they used 'paltering'—mixing truth with omissions—to mislead the public about emissions reductions, renewable energy investments, and the viability of technologies like carbon capture and algae biofuels.

The document explores Africa's potential to become a leader in synthetic carbon dioxide removal, particularly through direct air capture (DAC). It identifies the East African Rift, especially Kenya, as an ideal hub due to its abundant geothermal energy and basaltic rock formations suitable for permanent carbon mineralization. The report details current projects, such as Octavia Carbon's Project Hummingbird, and outlines necessary innovations in energy efficiency, geological storage, and project development to scale the industry. It also emphasizes the role of voluntary carbon markets and supportive regulatory frameworks in overcoming financing gaps for first-of-a-kind projects.

The report argues that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is undermining national energy security and economic competitiveness by canceling billions in congressionally mandated funding for clean energy and industrial innovation. It details the loss of approximately $23 billion in federal funding across 648 projects, affecting sectors such as carbon capture, hydrogen, and grid resiliency. The document highlights that these cuts risk wasting previous federal R&D investments, destroying local jobs, and ceding technological leadership to global competitors like China and Canada.

The document asserts that Canada is falling behind its 2030 and 2035 emissions targets and should utilize Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) to achieve cost-effective reductions. It suggests that Canada can leverage its strengths in methane detection, clean electricity, and carbon removal technologies to create bilateral agreements, similar to Japan's Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM). The report warns that simple liquefied natural gas (LNG) export deals are unlikely to meet strict Article 6 additionality requirements and recommends establishing a national coordination mechanism to integrate climate finance with trade and sustainable development goals in the Global South.

The document assesses Canada's current emissions trajectory and proposes the adoption of a structured ITMO framework, modeled after Japan's Joint Crediting Mechanism, to help Canada meet its 2030 and 2035 climate targets while promoting its clean-tech sector globally.

Texas can leverage its existing oil and gas infrastructure, geological assets, and federal tax credits under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to become a global leader in carbon management, potentially attracting up to $94 billion in investments and creating up to 211,000 jobs by 2050.

The Clean Air Task Force urges the European Investment Bank to adopt a more strategic and technology-neutral lending policy for its 2026-30 roadmap. It argues that the EIB should move beyond its limited current support for nuclear fission, fusion, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) to provide patient capital and risk-sharing instruments for these indispensable technologies. The document specifically advocates for funding next-generation geothermal, small modular reactors, and industrial decarbonisation clusters to address hard-to-abate sectors and ensure a reliable, 24/7 clean energy supply for the EU.

The report analyzes the potential for California to meet its 2045 CDR target of 75 MMT CO2e by diversifying its portfolio with Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS) systems. Using seven scenarios based on cost and social acceptance, the study finds that BiCRS can remove between 13 and 75 MMT CO2e annually. Scenarios utilizing high biomass availability estimates show that BiCRS alone could meet the state's target, potentially reducing costs and increasing bioenergy and job production by up to 10 times compared to the DAC-heavy 2022 Scoping Plan. However, scenarios with limited forest biomass availability fail to meet the target. The report highlights a trade-off between optimizing biomass for CDR versus sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production and recommends expanding the state's CDR portfolio beyond hydrogen-based BECCS.

The document identifies a significant funding and deployment gap for carbon removal, estimating a need for at least 100 megatons per annum (Mtpa) and $20 billion per year by 2035. It proposes a government-led Advance Market Commitment (AMC) as a mechanism to guarantee future markets, reduce costs through economies of scale, and harmonize global standards. The paper provides a design framework for such an AMC, covering product eligibility, procurement processes, and cross-border funding, while outlining the complementary roles of corporations, philanthropy, NGOs, and academia.

The report examines the ecological and human rights risks associated with atmosphere-based, marine, and land-based geoengineering. It argues that these speculative interventions could trigger ecosystem collapse, exacerbate ocean acidification, and violate the rights of millions, particularly Indigenous Peoples and rural communities. The author advocates for the enforcement of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity's moratorium on geoengineering and a shift toward proven climate solutions.

As federal support for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) faces rollbacks, U.S. states are positioned to advance direct air capture (DAC) by aligning specific technology types with local assets. The report identifies a diverse range of DAC technologies—from fully electric systems to those requiring high-temperature heat—and maps them to state-level opportunities. For example, California's geothermal resources and Texas's renewable curtailment and CO2 infrastructure offer distinct advantages. While some states like Washington and Texas are suited for large-scale sequestration, others like Massachusetts can serve as innovation hubs for waste-heat recovery and CO2 utilization. The document emphasizes that maximizing climate benefit requires pairing DAC with low-carbon energy to avoid eroding net removals.

The report finds that while durable CDR (storage >1,000 years) is essential for neutralizing fossil emissions, corporate uptake is low and concentrated among a few companies, notably Microsoft. Many companies instead rely on non-durable CDR, which the authors argue is unsuitable for neutralizing long-cycle emissions. The report highlights risks of double counting between companies and governments and a systemic lack of transparency regarding the environmental and social impacts of CDR projects. It recommends that voluntary initiatives like SBTi require companies to set separate monetary and removal targets based on ability to pay, rather than merging them into net-zero goals.

The Carbon Crediting Data Framework (CCDF) is a four-part toolkit (executive report, implementation spreadsheet, technical documentation, and JSON schema) created by RMI's Carbon Markets Initiative to address data fragmentation in the voluntary carbon market (VCM). The framework synthesizes requirements from over 160 sources to provide a common language for 570 individual data fields across 22 categories and 48 sub-categories. It organizes data into four tiers based on the project lifecycle: Pre-Registration (Tier 0), Validation (Tier 1), Verification (Tier 2), and Innovation & Ambition (Tier 3). The CCDF specifically integrates socio-environmental (SE) data as core benefits rather than optional add-ons, drawing on standards from international finance institutions and the UN. Early implementation by Centigrade demonstrates that the framework can reduce due diligence time and transaction costs, which can otherwise exceed $100,000 per project. RMI is also using the CCDF to support the Carbon Data Open Protocol (CDOP) in developing a unified VCM data schema.

The report examines how coastal desalination plants can integrate carbon removal technologies, such as Direct Ocean Capture (DOC), Electrochemical Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (eOAE), and Direct Air Capture (DAC), by leveraging existing seawater pumping infrastructure and brine outflows. It identifies significant synergies, including reduced energy costs when using concentrated brines and potential energy savings of up to 30% through shared infrastructure. While theoretical carbon removal capacities are high—with eOAE potentially reaching 200 MtCO2/y under ideal conditions—the report highlights critical constraints such as high low-carbon energy requirements (up to 2.8 MWh/tCO2), the need for large-scale acid or chlorine byproduct offtake, and the necessity for rigorous environmental safety testing regarding pH and salinity changes in marine ecosystems.

The report outlines the commercial and climate imperatives for heavy industries to adopt carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. It identifies synergies where industrial waste, infrastructure, and expertise can accelerate the scale-up of biogenic, geochemical, and synthetic CDR. The document provides a framework for monetization through carbon credits, green premiums, and government incentives, while warning against 'mitigation deterrence'—the risk that CDR replaces essential decarbonization efforts.

The document reports a decline in Chinese crude oil consumption and LNG imports, alongside significant economic and regulatory volatility in the US oil and gas sector. It highlights corporate shifts at Shell and BP, the risk of USD 2.3 trillion in stranded fossil fuel assets, and various international developments in LNG and carbon capture.