In a report that has been published by Resources for the Future, ‘Policy Incentives to Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Analysis and Recommendations’, James Boyd, Emily Joiner, Alan Krupnick and Michael Toman have set out the manner in which policy-making can catalyze the growth of CDR in the US.
Key takeaways:
- In the US, there are a number of policy measures incentivizing the uptake of certain CDR activities.
- Nonetheless, CDR activities have not grown to the extent necessary, leading to the emergence of a ‘removal gap’, a concept that refers to the quantity of CDR that is necessary for countering temperature rise in view of the forecasts regarding GHG emissions and steps that have been taken for mitigation purposes.
- Given that the US is among the countries releasing the highest amount of GHG, it should pioneer the efforts geared towards the implementation of CDR methods and policies.
- The so-called ‘cap-and-trade or carbon pricing system’ (‘CAT + or CP+’) whereby CDR can be used in addition to emission cuts is cost efficient, applicable to all CDR technologies and facilitates the funding of CDR activities by private parties.
- Other approaches that may be used as alternatives to CDR include the introduction of rules requiring emitters to buy a certain quantity of CDR in proportion to their emissions, recourse to voluntary CDR, public funding of CDR and financial incentives decreasing CDR costs.
- Initially, CDR activities should be supported by governments. However, the involvement of the governments should be followed by the facilitation of CDR activities by private entities.
- The pace at which traditional CDR activities relying on land are carried out should be increased by giving due weight to the issues concerning the changes to be made to the purposes for which land is used and authentication of CDR credits.
- Other matters with respect to the costs, adequate employment as well as the adverse environmental and social impacts of Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) and Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) should be tackled.
- The creation of additional new CDR methods should be facilitated.
- Policymakers should act swiftly to ensure that the number of CDR activities can grow in due time and more stringent mitigation benchmarks meet a weaker political backlash.
- The moral hazard that may emerge as a result of CDR activities should be addressed promptly.
- The negative financial impact of net zero policies upon the poorer segments of the society or private entities that engage in certain activities can be redressed through the use of compensatory measures.
Read the full report here: Policy Incentives to Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Analysis and Recommendations