How should the permanence of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) be governed? New CO₂RE blog and report explore these questions, co-authored with Josh Burke.

There are many CDR methods, and implementation strategies need to reflect their differences, including the permanence of carbon storage. Measures that govern CDR permanence are crucial for the effective scale up and delivery of CDR, which is vital to achieve net zero targets.

With COP28, where CDR will surface in a range of contexts, it’s important to bear in mind the challenging governance issues around permanence, which most countries have yet to address.

Based on a mapping of existing measures, the authors suggest a three-stage approach of policies: 
1.     Certifying removals via a monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) scheme
2.     Adopting measures to govern the risks of reversal
3.     Creating tradability – policy bundles that combine some or all of the measures

Different ‘policy bundles’ can address different permanence levels. Less permanent CDR requires a higher the regulatory burden, and more permanent CDR has a lower regulatory burden. Measures such as MRV and liability need to apply to all CDR regardless of permanence.

How the different permanence characteristics of CDR methods are incorporated into emerging CDR policies will not only determine the credibility of efforts to integrate CDR into existing climate policy instruments, such as compliance markets. It will also be a key factor in scaling up high quality removals. If less permanent removals are not adequately regulated, ‘cheap’ credits could lead to weaker incentives for more permanent CDR methods.

The report explains why a carefully designed package of measures and policies are key for scaling up high quality removals and how they can be designed and implemented.

Read the blog: https://co2re.org/cdr-permanence-blog/
Full report: https://co2re.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CO2RE_Report_CDR_Permanence-FINAL-v7.pdf