Carbon dioxide removal technologies are not born equal

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage074021
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue7
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume16
dc.contributor.authorStrefler, Jessica
dc.contributor.authorBauer, Nico
dc.contributor.authorHumpenöder, Florian
dc.contributor.authorKlein, David
dc.contributor.authorPopp, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorKriegler, Elmar
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-02T09:19:52Z
dc.date.available2022-12-02T09:19:52Z
dc.date.issued2021-7-1
dc.description.abstractTechnologies for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere have been recognized as an important part of limiting warming to well below 2 °C called for in the Paris Agreement. However, many scenarios so far rely on bioenergy in combination with carbon capture and storage as the only CDR technology. Various other options have been proposed, but have scarcely been taken up in an integrated assessment of mitigation pathways. In this study we analyze a comprehensive portfolio of CDR options in terms of their regional and temporal deployment patterns in climate change mitigation pathways and the resulting challenges. We show that any CDR option with sufficient potential can reduce the economic costs of achieving the 1.5 °C target substantially without increasing the temperature overshoot. CDR helps to reduce net CO2 emissions faster and achieve carbon neutrality earlier. The regional distribution of CDR deployment in cost-effective mitigation pathways depends on which options are available. If only enhanced weathering of rocks on croplands or re- and afforestation are available, Latin America and Asia cover nearly all of global CDR deployment. Besides fairness and sustainability concerns, such a regional concentration would require large international transfers and thus strong international institutions. In our study, the full portfolio scenario is the most balanced from a regional perspective. This indicates that different CDR options should be developed such that all regions can contribute according to their regional potentials.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/10482
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34657/9518
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBristol : IOP Publ.
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac0a11
dc.relation.essn1748-9326
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEnvironmental research letters : ERL 16 (2021), Nr. 7
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unported
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectcarbon dioxide removaleng
dc.subjectCDReng
dc.subjectclimate change mitigationeng
dc.subjectIAMeng
dc.subjectnegative emissionseng
dc.subject.ddc690
dc.titleCarbon dioxide removal technologies are not born equaleng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleEnvironmental research letters : ERL
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIK
wgl.subjectUmweltwissenschaftenger
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikelger
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Carbon_dioxide_removal.pdf
Size:
906.79 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: