IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/129071.html

Towards improved cost estimates for monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide removal

Author

Listed:
  • Mercer, Leo
  • Burke, Josh
  • Rodway-Dyer, Sue

Abstract

Alongside actions to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, carbon dioxide will need to be removed from the atmosphere if the world is to meet the Paris Agreement climate goals. The proliferation of net zero targets, and by extension the use of carbon dioxide removal (CDR), has led to increased attention on the governance of CDR. Monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) is a central component of the governance architecture. This report examines the cost of MRV for different CDR methods, the extent to which the cost of MRV for different methods is perceived as a barrier to their upscaling, where opportunities lie to reduce the cost of MRV and what factors influence the choice of MRV protocol. It provides recommendations for the UK government but which are more widely applicable.

Suggested Citation

  • Mercer, Leo & Burke, Josh & Rodway-Dyer, Sue, 2024. "Towards improved cost estimates for monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide removal," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 129071, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:129071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/129071/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:osf:osfxxx:fu59w_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Stephanie Arcusa & Starry Sprenkle-Hyppolite, 2022. "Snapshot of the Carbon Dioxide Removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022)," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(9-10), pages 1319-1332, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Campbell, James S. & Foteinis, Spyros & Pereira, Reinaldo Lee & Katish, Mohamed & Renforth, Phil, 2026. "Harnessing naturally occurring sodium carbonate and bicarbonate for gigatonne-scale carbon dioxide removal," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).

    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. Lackner, Klaus & Arcusa, Stephanie & Azarabadi, Habib & Sriramprasad, Vishrudh & Page, Robert, 2023. "Eliminating the Need for Life Cycle Analysis for Carbon Accounting and in the Certification of Carbon Sequestration," OSF Preprints q9pzb, Center for Open Science.
    2. N. K. Kurichev & A. V. Ptichnikov & E. A. Shvarts & A. N. Krenke, 2023. "Nature-Based Offsets in Russia: Key Challenges and Conditions for Success," Regional Research of Russia, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 595-608, December.
    3. Jens Leifeld & Sonja M. Paul & Miriam Gross-Schmölders & Yuqiao Wang & Chloé Wüst-Galley, 2025. "Crediting peatland rewetting for carbon farming: some considerations amidst optimism," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 1-19, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Holly Jean Buck & Wim Carton & Jens Friis Lund & Nils Markusson, 2023. "Why residual emissions matter right now," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 13(4), pages 351-358, April.
    6. Stephanie Arcusa & Emily Hagood, 2025. "Definitions and mechanisms for managing durability and reversals in standards and procurers of carbon dioxide removal," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 1-23, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:129071. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.