Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is often described as potentially serving three core purposes: 
- to accelerate net emission reductions prior to net zero CO2
- to balance out residual emissions
- to achieve a long-term decline in warming through net negative emissions
However, as the academic literature on CDR continues to evolve rapidly, more and more narratives about the role of CDR are emerging. 
While this growing body of literature helps to close evidence gaps, it can also make the picture more complex, making it harder for users of scientific evidence to navigate and reconcile partly contradictory messages about CDR. 
In a new Comment, published this week in Nature Reviews Clean Technology and co-led with Quirina Rodriguez Mendez, we discuss ten prominent narratives about the role of CDR in the current academic discourse. 
These narratives are: 
- CDR as an accelerator
- CDR as compensation
- CDR for warming reversal
- CDR as preventive
- CDR as a remedial measure
- CDR as a sustainability enabler
- CDR for non-critical needs
- CDR as mitigation deterrence
- CDR as an underperformer
- CDR as a sustainability threat
While some of these narratives foreground the potential opportunities of CDR deployment, others focus more on its potential risks. Narratives also pertain to different time frames: some are especially relevant in the near term, while others focus more on long-term developments. 
As part of our Comment, we also explore the assumptions that need to be made for a narrative to be logically coherent. Exploring and comparing these underlying implicit assumptions allows us to identify which of the narratives are compatible with each other and which are in conflict. 
In doing so, our Comment facilitates engagement with complex information in a nuanced way, allowing for better comparisons, critiques, and contextualization of new information about CDR. 
Going forward, we suggest that researchers should more systematically reflect on and disclose the assumptions and time frames underpinning the conceptual frameworks that guide their work. 
Link to the Comment: Mapping conflicts in carbon removal narratives | Nature Reviews Clean Technology
Quirina Rodriguez Mendez, Robert J. Brecha, Elina Brutschin, Sabine Fuss, Matthew J. Gidden, William F. Lamb, Naomi E. Vaughan & Gaurav Ganti
@PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
@Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
@Climate Analytics
@University of Dayton Hanley Sustainability Institute
@International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
@Center for Global Sustainability
@Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Link to the pdf in the comments of this post.
Here is the direct link to the pdf: https://rdcu.be/ibHx9J6SBDta