IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v19y2019i4p487-494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Targeting carbon dioxide removal in the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Oliver Geden
  • Glen P. Peters
  • Vivian Scott

Abstract

In principle, many climate policymakers have accepted that large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement’s mitigation targets, but they have avoided proposing by whom CDR might be delivered. Given its role in international climate policy, the European Union (EU) might be expected to lead the way. But among EU climate policymakers so far there is little talk on CDR, let alone action. Here we assess how best to ‘target’ CDR to motivate EU policymakers exploring which CDR target strategy may work best to start dealing with CDR on a meaningful scale. A comprehensive CDR approach would focus on delivering the CDR volumes required from the EU by 2100, approximately at least 50 Gigatonnes (Gt) CO2, according to global model simulations aiming to keep warming below 2°C. A limited CDR approach would focus on an intermediate target to deliver the CDR needed to reach ‘net zero emissions’ (i.e. the gross negative emissions needed to offset residual positive emissions that are too expensive or even impossible to mitigate). We argue that a comprehensive CDR approach may be too intimidating for EU policymakers. A limited CDR approach that only addresses the necessary steps to reach the (intermediate) target of ‘net zero emissions’ is arguably more achievable, since it is a better match to the existing policy paradigm and would allow for a pragmatic phase-in of CDR while avoiding outright resistance by environmental NGOs and the broader public.Key policy insights Making CDR an integral part of EU climate policy has the potential to significantly reshape the policy landscape. Burden sharing considerations would probably play a major role, with comprehensive CDR prolonging the disparity and tensions between progressives and laggards. Introducing limited CDR in the context of ‘net zero’ pathways would retain a visible primary focus on decarbonization but acknowledge the need for a significant enhancement of removals via ‘natural’ and/or ‘engineered’ sinks. A decarbonization approach that intends to lead to a low level of ‘residual emissions’ (to be tackled by a pragmatic phase-in of CDR) should be the priority of EU climate policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Oliver Geden & Glen P. Peters & Vivian Scott, 2019. "Targeting carbon dioxide removal in the European Union," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 487-494, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:19:y:2019:i:4:p:487-494
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1536600
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2018.1536600
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2018.1536600?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Negri, Valentina & Galán-Martín, Ángel & Pozo, Carlos & Fajardy, Mathilde & Reiner, David M. & Mac Dowell, Niall & Guillén-Gosálbez, Gonzalo, 2021. "Life cycle optimization of BECCS supply chains in the European Union," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    2. Wang, Rujie & Liu, Shanshan & Li, Qiangwei & Zhang, Shihan & Wang, Lidong & An, Shanlong, 2021. "CO2 capture performance and mechanism of blended amine solvents regulated by N-methylcyclohexyamine," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PB).
    3. Galán-Martín, Ángel & Contreras, María del Mar & Romero, Inmaculada & Ruiz, Encarnación & Bueno-Rodríguez, Salvador & Eliche-Quesada, Dolores & Castro-Galiano, Eulogio, 2022. "The potential role of olive groves to deliver carbon dioxide removal in a carbon-neutral Europe: Opportunities and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    4. Meier, Felix & Rickels, Wilfried & Quaas, Martin F. & Traeger, Christian, 2022. "Carbon dioxide removal in a global analytic climate economy," Kiel Working Papers 2227, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    5. Izabela Horzela & Sławomir Gromadzki & Jarosław Gryz & Tomasz Kownacki & Aneta Nowakowska-Krystman & Marzena Piotrowska-Trybull & Radosław Wisniewski, 2021. "Energy Portfolio of the Eastern Poland Macroregion in the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-28, December.
    6. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin & Löschel, Andreas, 2021. "The demand for voluntary carbon sequestration: Experimental evidence from a reforestation project in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-088, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Iwona Bąk & Anna Barwińska-Małajowicz & Grażyna Wolska & Paweł Walawender & Paweł Hydzik, 2021. "Is the European Union Making Progress on Energy Decarbonisation While Moving towards Sustainable Development?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Wilfried Rickels & Roland Rothenstein, 2022. "CO2-Zentralbank: Rechtzeitiger Zertifikateankauf [CO2 Central Bank: Timely purchase of certificates]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 102(4), pages 249-249, April.
    9. Fridahl, Mathias & Schenuit, Felix & Lundberg, Liv & Möllersten, Kenneth & Böttcher, Miranda & Rickels, Wilfried & Hansson, Anders, 2023. "Novel carbon dioxide removals techniques must be integrated into the European Union’s climate policies," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 281982, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Ángel Galán-Martín & Daniel Vázquez & Selene Cobo & Niall Dowell & José Antonio Caballero & Gonzalo Guillén-Gosálbez, 2021. "Delaying carbon dioxide removal in the European Union puts climate targets at risk," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    More about this item

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:19:y:2019:i:4:p:487-494. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.