IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v30y2025i6d10.1007_s11027-025-10235-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effective and fair policy to mobilize industrial carbon dioxide removal

Author

Listed:
  • Soyoung Oh

    (Tufts University
    Perspectives Climate Research gGmbH)

  • Samuel Eberenz

    (Risk-Dialogue Foundation)

  • Matthias Honegger

    (Perspectives Climate Research gGmbH
    Utrecht University)

  • Olivia Wallis

    (Perspectives Climate Research gGmbH)

  • Axel Michaelowa

    (Perspectives Climate Research gGmbH
    University of Zurich)

  • Matthias Poralla

    (Perspectives Climate Research gGmbH)

Abstract

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which emerged in climate models as a largely abstract idea, has evolved into a set of specific methods and spawned calls for supportive policies. Industrial approaches through the use of biomass combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), as well as direct air capture with storage (DACS) compete for scarce resources. We examine emerging conflicts that shape policy design to mobilize industrial removals by examining ideas, institutions, and interests and their interplay, conflicts, and alignments. We base our analysis on semi-structured interviews and stakeholder workshops in addition to emerging CDR policy literature. Arguably, technology developers, industry, civil society, and policymakers put forward ideas in a way that tends to advance their interests over others. Dominant ideas of CDR methods – including the notion that these would inherently be done at a large scale – have proven challenging to forming constructive policy discussion and made unhelpful generalizations of environmental performance, social desirability, or scalability of entire CDR methods. We outline opportunities and barriers to advance sound policies that scale the removal of CO2 effectively, efficiently, and fairly by outlining synergies, trade-offs, and conflicts in the current policymaking landscape of BECCS and DACS.

Suggested Citation

  • Soyoung Oh & Samuel Eberenz & Matthias Honegger & Olivia Wallis & Axel Michaelowa & Matthias Poralla, 2025. "Effective and fair policy to mobilize industrial carbon dioxide removal," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 1-22, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:30:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-025-10235-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-025-10235-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-025-10235-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-025-10235-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Honegger, 2023. "Toward the effective and fair funding of CO2 removal technologies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-3, December.
    2. Marilou Jobin & Michael Siegrist, 2020. "Support for the Deployment of Climate Engineering: A Comparison of Ten Different Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1058-1078, May.
    3. Kimberly S. Wolske & Kaitlin T. Raimi & Victoria Campbell-Arvai & P. Sol Hart, 2019. "Public support for carbon dioxide removal strategies: the role of tampering with nature perceptions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 345-361, March.
    4. John E. T. Bistline & David T. Young, 2022. "The role of natural gas in reaching net-zero emissions in the electric sector," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Jing-Li Fan & Jingying Fu & Xian Zhang & Kai Li & Wenlong Zhou & Klaus Hubacek & Johannes Urpelainen & Shuo Shen & Shiyan Chang & Siyue Guo & Xi Lu, 2023. "Co-firing plants with retrofitted carbon capture and storage for power-sector emissions mitigation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 13(8), pages 807-815, August.
    6. Ariane Wenger & Michael Stauffacher & Irina Dallo, 2021. "Public perception and acceptance of negative emission technologies – framing effects in Switzerland," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    8. Jonas Meckling & Eric Biber, 2021. "A policy roadmap for negative emissions using direct air capture," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-6, December.
    9. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Linzenich, A. & Kaetelhoen, A. & Sternberg, A. & Bardow, A. & Ziefle, M., 2019. "Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 235-249.
    10. Giulia Realmonte & Laurent Drouet & Ajay Gambhir & James Glynn & Adam Hawkes & Alexandre C. Köberle & Massimo Tavoni, 2019. "An inter-model assessment of the role of direct air capture in deep mitigation pathways," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Emily Cox & Elspeth Spence & Nick Pidgeon, 2020. "Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(8), pages 744-749, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sean Low & Livia Fritz & Chad M. Baum & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2024. "Public perceptions on carbon removal from focus groups in 22 countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Benjamin K. Sovacool & Chad M. Baum & Sean Low, 2022. "Determining our climate policy future: expert opinions about negative emissions and solar radiation management pathways," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(8), pages 1-50, December.
    3. Chad M. Baum & Livia Fritz & Sean Low & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2024. "Public perceptions and support of climate intervention technologies across the Global North and Global South," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Elspeth Spence & Emily Cox & Nick Pidgeon, 2021. "Exploring cross-national public support for the use of enhanced weathering as a land-based carbon dioxide removal strategy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Ariane Wenger & Michael Stauffacher & Irina Dallo, 2021. "Public perception and acceptance of negative emission technologies – framing effects in Switzerland," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Merk, Christine & Liebe, Ulf & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2023. "German citizens’ preference for domestic carbon dioxide removal by afforestation is incompatible with national removal potential," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 270884, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Fikru, Mahelet G., 2025. "Policy preference for a net zero carbon economy: Results from a US national survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    8. An, Keju & Farooqui, Azharuddin & McCoy, Sean T., 2022. "The impact of climate on solvent-based direct air capture systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    9. Khalili, Siavash & Lopez, Gabriel & Breyer, Christian, 2025. "Role and trends of flexibility options in 100% renewable energy system analyses towards the Power-to-X Economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    10. Shannan K. Sweet & Jonathon P. Schuldt & Johannes Lehmann & Deborah A. Bossio & Dominic Woolf, 2021. "Perceptions of naturalness predict US public support for Soil Carbon Storage as a climate solution," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Kuhn, Annegret & Merk, Christine & Wunsch, Andrea, 2024. "Carbon dioxide removal through ecosystem restoration: Public perceptions and political participation," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 306554, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    12. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Baum, Chad M. & Low, Sean, 2023. "Beyond climate stabilization: Exploring the perceived sociotechnical co-impacts of carbon removal and solar geoengineering," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    13. Zhang, Jing & Liu, Yu & Yang, Lingyu & Zhang, Jinzhu & Li, Xinbei, 2025. "An assessment of the effectiveness of CCS technology incentive policies based on dynamic CGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    14. Zhou, Wenlong & Fan, Wenrong & Lan, Rujia & Su, Wenlong & Fan, Jing-Li, 2025. "Retrofitted CCS technologies enhance economy, security, and equity in achieving carbon zero in power sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 378(PA).
    15. Katherine Romanak & Mathias Fridahl & Tim Dixon, 2021. "Attitudes on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a Mitigation Technology within the UNFCCC," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, January.
    16. Alexey Cherepovitsyn & Tatiana Chvileva & Sergey Fedoseev, 2020. "Popularization of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology in Society: Principles and Methods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-24, November.
    17. Motlaghzadeh, Kasra & Schweizer, Vanessa & Craik, Neil & Moreno-Cruz, Juan, 2023. "Key uncertainties behind global projections of direct air capture deployment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    18. Matilyn Bindl & Morgan R. Edwards & Ryna Yiyun Cui, 2025. "Risks of relying on uncertain carbon dioxide removal in climate policy," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-12, December.
    19. Kuhn, Annegret & Merk, Christine & Wunsch, Andrea, 2025. "Carbon dioxide removal through ecosystem restoration: Public perceptions and political participation," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 318200, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Salehi, Nafiseh & Colosi, Lisa M. & Shafiee-Jood, Majid, 2025. "Evaluating the suitability of direct air carbon capture and storage in Virginia using geospatial multi-criteria decision analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:30:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-025-10235-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.