The Role of Carbon Removal in Achieving Net Zero

It's a day of cognitive dissonance for those working on and thinking about carbon. On the one had, we have a report that the United Nations is going to "attack companies' reliance on carbon credits." On the other, we have a report out that says we are way behind on the development of adequate CO2 removal capacity to stay 1.5 degree aligned. The one report seems to question the very idea of a voluntary carbon market, the other underlines its importance. (I will link both reports in the comments and to an excellent article by Margaret Morales which summarizes the CDR report). So what's going on? Are carbon markets good or bad? Should companies buy credits or not? Things are not as confusing as they first appear. First, the UN: what they are saying if that companies should not rely on "offsets" to deliver emissions REDUCTIONS. In other words, companies ought to focus on reducing their own emissions and should not rely on offsets to do the job for them. This is a remarkably uncontroversial statement, the equivalent of the American Medical Association announcing, "Patients Should Not Rely on Ambulances to Provide Long-Term Care." Note that this is quite different from saying that companies should not engage in voluntary action to compensate for unabated emissions on their path to (and at) net-zero. And the other report on CDR illustrates why the UN would not say such a thing. Under 1.5 degree scenarios we must not only cut emissions, we must - let me repeat, MUST - remove a tremendous amount of CO2 from the atmosphere - 4 billion tonnes per year in the BEST CASE scenario.). Currently, we remove about 2 billion tonnes. And the only way we have even a chance at scaling up CDR to the required levels by 2030 is to scale nature-based removals, which will account for the vast majority of removals in the short-term. Governments' NDCs don't even close 50% of the gap in our removals capacity, under the best case scenario. In other words, we all, collectively - market skeptics, market believers, corporates, project developers, ENGOs - ALL OF US - have to figure out how to pay for and implement the removal of AT LEAST an additional ~2 billion tonnes of CO2 annually, or we will FAIL. This science is why I recommend we all stop using the word "voluntary" when describing carbon markets for corporate action. They are "voluntary" in the same sense that an ambulance is "voluntary" when you are facing an urgent, life-or-death need to get to an emergency room. Bottom line: this is way less complicated than it seems. Corporates: 1) reduce and eliminate every emission you possibly can. 2) then, purchase carbon credits (including but not limited to removals) to compensate for whatever you can't reduce. The rest of us: keep our eye on the ball, use every tool at our disposal to protect natural systems where they exist, restore them where they are damaged, and re-establish them where we can. We have six years - let's do this!

Beyond reducing emissions, we need to actively remove carbon from the atmosphere. Google is stepping up to the challenge, tripling its investment in carbon removal in 2024 to over $100 million. Here's how we're putting those resources to work: 🟢 Natural Carbon Sinks: Supporting projects focused on restoring forests and vital ocean ecosystems, recognizing their critical role in carbon sequestration. We are co-founders of Symbiosis Coalition, an organization dedicated to rigorous measurement for best-in-class nature-based projects. 🟢 Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW): Partnering with companies like Terradot to advance ERW, a process that accelerates natural CO2 absorption by spreading crushed rock on farmland, which also has the added benefit of improved soil health. 🟢 Waste Biomass Utilization: Investing in projects that convert waste biomass into stable forms that lock away carbon for centuries, preventing its release into the atmosphere. This includes support for biochar projects like Varaha and Charm Industrial, which provide co-benefits to local farmers. Our deals with these two companies are the largest biochar carbon removal purchases to date. 🟢 Direct Air Capture (DAC) Technology: Funding innovative DAC technologies, like Holocene, to make this potentially game-changing approach more cost-effective for large-scale deployment. Our deal with Holocene set a record low price target for DAC credits. These efforts are a testament to Google's commitment to a sustainable future. Recognizing that carbon removal is a complex and evolving field, I am proud to work for a company that is committed to continuous learning, adaptation, and collaboration when it comes to reversing climate change. Read more on our Keyword blog here: https://lnkd.in/gCgDMY8S #Sustainability #ClimateAction #CarbonRemoval #Google #Innovation #NetZero

Will the VCM become a carbon removals market? To get there, we’ll need stronger demand signals. Carbon Direct’s 2023 State of the Voluntary Carbon Market report framed the VCM as “a tale of two markets”: while the carbon avoidance and reduction market is stagnating, the removals market has increased 5x since 2021. The growing interest in carbon removal is good news for the climate. For the carbon market to be an effective tool for reaching planetary net zero, we’ll need to ramp up removal credits. While reduction and avoidance credits can extend our climate runway, smooth the path to net zero, and provide transformative co-benefits, they can’t ultimately get us to planetary net zero. For that, we’ll need to both avoid all emissions possible AND remove all residual emissions. But - and here’s the kicker - removals currently make up only 3% of all credits issued on the voluntary carbon market (15% if you count those from projects that deliver both reduction and removal credits from all time on the VCM). And the removals market is producing <1% of what the IPCC models estimate we'll need to reach net zero by 2050. In other words, it’s a steep climb from here to a meaningfully-sized carbon removals market. Scaling carbon removals to the level needed for net zero will require a massive ramp-up of technological solutions and capacity, alongside a dramatic shift in market dynamics. One of the most effective levers to accelerate this shift is strong demand signals for carbon removals. Commitments like Frontier are at the leading edge here. The US Department of Energy, Fossil Energy and Carbon Management is also making efforts to fill this need, running a #CDR Purchase Pilot Prize with $35M available in offtake agreements. Though the prize money is a small sliver of what will be required to scale carbon removal to the level necessary for planetary net zero, efforts like these catalyze follow-on funding and provide the demand signals project developers need to scale their efforts. #climate #carbonremoval #carbonmarkets

Big moment in EU climate policy. Brussels is now considering allowing carbon removals and credits to count toward the 2040 target. It's a response to political pressure and the hard truth: industrial decarbonisation alone won’t get us there. Removals are no longer a distant solution - they’re fast becoming central to how we meet climate goals in the 2030s. This opens up big questions. Will the EU allow removals from outside its borders via Article 6? If so, it could unlock serious demand for projects in places like Brazil, Colombia and Namibia — but only if they meet high-integrity standards. And what kinds of removals will count? Biochar? Enhanced weathering? Forestry with long-term safeguards? How the EU answers these questions will shape the global removals market for years. What’s clear is this: the world is steadily but surely waking up to the fact we can’t hit net zero without removals. The only debate now is which ones, where, and under what rules. #carbonremoval #Article6 #CDR https://lnkd.in/ekYeM7Jg