NDC Opportunities for Incorporating Technological Carbon Removal

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) includes activities and methods that remove carbon dioxide (CO2) directly from the air. This encompasses conventional approaches, such as planting trees, as well as more novel, often technology-based approaches. (For more information on conventional, nature-based CDR, see the forest and land-use sector page.)

Technological CDR includes many different types of methods. These range from direct air capture (DAC) — machines that pull CO2 out of the air, after which it can be stored permanently underground — to carbon mineralization, one application of which involves adding ground minerals to soils or the ocean to react with CO2 and sequester carbon as a result.

Many other types of approaches have been proposed or are in development, including some that use biomass to sequester carbon or seek to increase the ocean’s carbon sequestration capacity. Carbon removal approaches are different from carbon capture and storage (CCS), where emissions are captured at a source (like a cement plant), preventing them from entering the atmosphere.

Most technological CDR options are in the early stages of development, demonstration or commercialization, and are generally still costly today. They all have trade-offs that will need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, considering environmental and social impacts as well as local community perspectives.

Why Carbon Removal Matters

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has made it clear that limiting temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F) is contingent on reaching net-zero CO2 emissions by mid-century. This will require deep and rapid emissions reductions first and foremost, as well as the scale-up of CDR. Developing a portfolio of CDR options will help balance risks and benefits associated with each type of approach and reduce the impact if any one approach fails to deliver the expected removals.

CDR will play crucial roles in helping meet global climate goals. In the years leading up to mid-century, carbon removal is needed to counterbalance emissions that cannot be avoided or reduced for technological or economic reasons. Often referred to as “residual emissions,” these could include emissions from heavy industry, agriculture, aviation and shipping. In the longer term, once net zero is achieved, carbon removal can help the global community achieve net-negative emissions and reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations to safer levels.

The amount of carbon removal required to reach net zero is inversely proportional to the scale of emissions reduction. The more emissions are reduced, the less carbon removal will be needed.

Modeling by the IPCC and others shows a wide range of potential scales of CDR needed by mid-century to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C: generally around 5-10 billion metric tons (GtCO2) per year across both nature-based and technological CDR, and roughly 1-5 GtCO2/year for technological CDR alone. These ranges are based on differing assumptions as to how much abatement happens in other sectors and how much CDR is possible. Once net zero is reached, carbon removal will need to be scaled further to reach net-negative emissions and reduce atmospheric CO2.

Carbon removal will play a critical role in meeting global climate goals. However, it cannot take the place of emissions reductions, which are the top priority and will play the biggest mitigation role. It is generally more costly and difficult to emit CO2 now and remove it later, compared to not emitting CO2 to begin with. There is also uncertainty around the scalability of carbon removal technologies, considering resource and sustainability implications and other types of environmental and social impacts.

As such, it is important to clearly define the role of CDR in climate plans in relation to emissions reduction to ensure that CDR is compensating for emissions that can’t be abated in other ways.  

Recent Developments

In just the last five or so years, carbon removal technologies have transformed from a niche concept to a common component of climate action portfolios, supported by billions of dollars in public funding and private investment. The past few years have seen significant announcements, investments and policy advances. Some recent developments include:

United States

Under the Biden administration, the U.S. has focused on supporting technology development through billions of dollars in demonstration project funding in the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and increased levels of deployment support in the Inflation Reduction Act, among other efforts. In August 2023, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced recipients for the first $1.2 billion in funding (out of $3.5 billion total in the DAC hubs program supported by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law). Roughly $500 million was awarded to each of two DAC projects, in South Texas and Louisiana, and 19 other smaller awards were made to earlier stage feasibility and engineering studies across the country. An additional $1.8 billion opened for application in late 2024.  

In May 2024, the DOE announced semifinalists in its Carbon Dioxide Removal Purchase Pilot Prize, which is the first example of direct government procurement of carbon dioxide removal. The 25 semifinalists will compete in two more phases of the competition, with 10 finalists ultimately eligible to receive awards of up to $3 million each.

In the private sector, Microsoft is the largest corporate buyer of carbon dioxide removal, with more than 5 million tons of CO2 removal purchased in the first half of 2024 alone (and more than 8 million in total). Other buyers — like the Frontier group of companies, which has committed more than $1 billion collectively to support carbon removal through 2030 — purchased just under 200,000 tCO2 removal in the first half of 2024.

European Union

In April 2024, the European Parliament adopted a provisional agreement on its Carbon Removal and Carbon Farming (CRCF) certification regulation — the first government-led framework for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) for CDR. The CRCF regulation will certify three categories of removal: permanent carbon removal, removals related to land use and removal via storage of CO2 in products. The next step is for an expert group to develop methodologies for different types of CDR.  

Japan

In April 2024, Japan announced that it will allow the use of durable carbon removal credits in its emissions trading scheme. The ETS is voluntary through 2026 and will be compulsory after that.

Kenya

There has been strong interest in the potential for carbon dioxide removal in Kenya given its abundant geothermal capacity and basalt rock, which is suitable for storage of CO2 through mineralization. Companies such as Octavia Carbon, Great Carbon Valley and Cella are currently developing projects in Kenya. Others, such as Sirona Technologies and Climeworks, are looking to develop projects in the country as well.

United Kingdom

The U.K. Government held a consultation on whether and how to include greenhouse gas removal in the U.K. Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) between May and August 2024, and is in the process of analyzing the results.

How to Incorporate Technological CDR-Related Targets in NDCs

Large-scale carbon removal is crucial to meet global climate goals, but many CDR technologies are costly and still in development today. Countries that have the economic and technological capacity and are the largest historical emitters have a distinct responsibility to invest in the development, demonstration and ultimately deployment of CDR technologies. This will reduce costs and make these technologies and approaches more accessible in the future, so that they can be scaled up in the coming years and decades. Countries that have already indicated plans to rely on carbon removal technologies in their long-term climate strategies (LT-LEDs) can use NDCs to set near-term targets to enable that future use.

Countries planning to incorporate carbon removal into their NDCs can strengthen or include:

• Targets related to building up capacity around carbon removal development and deployment by increasing public R&D funding, developing research partnerships, offering research innovation and technology prizes, and/or developing fit-for-purpose governance and regulatory policy, among other actions.
• A specific target for scale-up of novel CDR under an economywide mitigation target (separate from targets for natural/conventional CDR and emissions reductions). This would ideally include specificity around:
  • The methodology used to quantify how much carbon removal is needed and what emissions sources it will counterbalance. Such information represents the first step toward helping ensure that CDR is a complement to, rather than a replacement for, emissions reductions by providing transparency and allowing scrutiny around the relative levels of each type of mitigation.
  • The intended type(s) of carbon dioxide removal to be deployed (such as direct air capture, enhanced rock weathering, biochar, etc.).
  • Measures to minimize negative ecological and social impacts and maximize co-benefits of planned CDR use (such as providing clarity on the source of biomass feedstock for biomass-based approaches; specifying the electricity source for approaches that use electricity; etc.).

_{Cover image by Katie Lebling/WRI}